These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#121 - 2013-11-08 15:31:54 UTC
If anything should have a "burst" mechanic with a long reload time, it should be remote reps.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#122 - 2013-11-08 15:32:09 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
The problem is nto on the hams, the problem is that the band of speed and signature where missiles do full damage reducing to no damage is TOO narrow


your absolutely right about the problem
sadly its a result of speed to signature ratio of the ships which you cant change cause it would have impact on much more than missiles.
you cant change the amo stats it self to widen the bandwidth of dmg appliance. (youd only move it)

so the only thing left would be to introduce a new factor into the formula which will proof very dificult if not impossible without major disturbances of balance untill all missiles are rebalanced again.

so the pragmatic part of me says "hey its not that broken that i'd have to try and fix it."
Laerise
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#123 - 2013-11-08 15:32:59 UTC
It would be pretty cool if rockets would be tweaked to work like this also. That'd make them a truely unique frigate sized weapon system, great for overpowering active tanks due to sheer dps, but worse against larger ships.

Actually they'd be like inverse artillery, where alpha is replaced by high rof and long reload timer. Smile
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#124 - 2013-11-08 15:33:50 UTC
Motoko Innocentius wrote:
Ok here's my take, this sounds like a good change.

For tweaking, i'd say lowering continuous dps by letsay 10-15% of rlml's would a good sweet spot. By continuous i mean if i have 2 x 3 rlml groups and i empty one launcher and start shooting with the other one when the reload time for first one will be done when second one starts reloading. For when using both a 50-60% increase in dps would be what i'd say is somethign i'd be willing to easily have for loss of some continuous dps. (these numbers are to be reflected on current rlml on tranquil and current proposal of rhml for rubicon)

Why? This gives me the perfect way of having extra dps for when i need it, for when i need less, i use less.

Hams, hams need abit more application ability, not much, enough to make them that small bit more effective against cruisers when using a painter (i see painter as being the webber blasters love for damage application). I'd also like to see some of hams max flight time moved to it's velocity, 25% or so. All this applies to torpedoes aswell, though i'd see torpedoes needing slightly more range also.

Hmls, well i'm not sure what to do with them, more application maybe, though currently, i see no reason for it, they're great for fleets and in fleets you can easily use painters and webbers to maximize damage output, just like you can with cruise missiles.

Anyways thats my opinion, and for the whiners, losing abit of overall dps for the ability to produce bigger burst (especially in solo and small gang situations where you really need to break that navy omens 200dps tank), long reload time doesn't mean you have to shoot all missiles from all tubes at the same time, use your brain and start making better arguments.



You shoud l use your brian and calcualte how much damage you can dish with ALL missiles ina cerberus for example (the ship that effectively mos tuse rapid launchers). 20 k damage.. no matter how you stagger it. You are just somethign lauguable. You will VERY rappdly brign your enemy to low armor.. then do nothing.. until he gets away or kills you.


That is NOT good!

Ever heard of the rabbit and the turtle child story? You know wich one won at the end?

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

M1k3y Koontz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2013-11-08 15:38:23 UTC
GallowsCalibrator wrote:
Lots of people not getting the potential of front-loaded dps against smaller targets in this thread I think.


Explain it to me, then. I don't see how its better than the current RML.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#126 - 2013-11-08 15:42:56 UTC
question does this mean the velocity/sig radius ship bonus will now work?

also i think PL are upset by the change cuss they were going to use ravens to kill tech III ships when they are in heavy tidi. this change kinda upsets thier plans.

though i think the idea is neat... perhaps there could be a skill added that reduces the reload time by 2 seconds per level. that way at lev V reload is only 30 seconds.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#127 - 2013-11-08 15:44:06 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:
If anything should have a "burst" mechanic with a long reload time, it should be remote reps.


yes make all asb and remote armor reps ammo based. that way if you want to use RR its burst only with a long reload.


tBH thats the best idea i heard in years!

seriously!

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Connall Tara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#128 - 2013-11-08 15:50:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Connall Tara
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
GallowsCalibrator wrote:
Lots of people not getting the potential of front-loaded dps against smaller targets in this thread I think.


Explain it to me, then. I don't see how its better than the current RML.



Its a matter of targets. this change shifts the RLML and RHML from being frontline omgwtf application all the time! weapons into something designed to slaughter fleet support ships.

consider... softer things. things which tend to survive through use of range and/or sig tanking. interceptors, ABC's, logi cruisers, Recons... there's all kinds of targets which could be scrubbed from the field in a rather short time frame with this idea.

you're dumping a rather large amount of damage onto these traditionally tricksy targets in a very short time frame, with frankly absurd damage application with the numbers involved. its like a slightly different form of alpha weapon with no need to worry about arty tracking... its really odd yet... cool.

I'm not saying that these are perfect in their current form, don't get me wrong, but the potential of this concept is astounding.


I'm very much intrigued.

Naomi Knight - "You must be CCP Rise alt , that would explain everything"

Kane Fenris
NWP
#129 - 2013-11-08 15:52:40 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:

though i think the idea is neat... perhaps there could be a skill added that reduces the reload time by 2 seconds per level. that way at lev V reload is only 30 seconds.


while i'd welcome 30s reload ....

PLZ not more missile support skills they already have lots.
if 30s reload would not be op just make it 30s.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#130 - 2013-11-08 15:53:34 UTC
Connall Tara wrote:
[

consider... softer things. things which tend to survive through use of range and/or sig tanking. interceptors, ABC's, logi cruisers, Recons... there's all kinds of targets which could be scrubbed from the field in a rather short time frame with this idea.

.


Or you could just use an actual dps ship to kill all of those except the interceptor, and do more dps, and then continue doing more dps instead of reloading for 40s.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#131 - 2013-11-08 15:54:00 UTC
If you want to balance RLMLs, start by balancing LMs.

I'd also have a think about just removing them altogether. People say that more options and more stuff is better, but if it's broken by definition (think about how caracals make destroyers totally obsolete), then it's better to just get rid of it.

Also, if you're going to have yet another very long reload timer module, having reload timers be visible somewhere would be great. The number of times I've been in a plex with my AAR reloading, and another guy about to land on me, then I make the wrong decision about staying or leaving because I'm too lazy to remember when I pressed the reload...
Capqu
Half Empty
#132 - 2013-11-08 16:00:08 UTC
well its certainly a change

guess we're gonna have t disband the Church of the Rapid Light tho
M1k3y Koontz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#133 - 2013-11-08 16:00:32 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Denuo Secus wrote:
I think HMLs should be more attractive again then. Compared with other medium long range turrets - which got a boost recently - they feel quite subpar. If RLMLs get a more specific role, I'd like to use HMLs more (on a Caracal for instance). But they are just plain bad. Especially in terms of damage application.


HMLs got nerfed because they were way better than other medium long range weapons, then other medium long range weapons got buffed. CCP, buff HMLs to be in line with arties and rails (does anyone use beams?), then people won't have as much of a reason to complain about this change.


My opinion of the RHML and RML now: meh. Whatever. I only trained it cause my alliance said "We're flying caracals!" and I was like "Cool!" and now it'll probably get dumpstered so there goes a week of training time. Obligatory "Grr Rise" comment.

That is all.
Also, stop nerfing Minmatar so bad, the Muninn is soooo shiiittt there is no good Minmatar HAC anymore :(

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Zilero
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#134 - 2013-11-08 16:01:28 UTC
40 second reload time?

Are you ******* kidding me.

This is beyond ********.
Marc McIntyre Crendraven
Knights Reborn
#135 - 2013-11-08 16:04:37 UTC
I use turrets almost exclusively and will likely never use these anyway, but I have to say that 40 seconds to reload or select damage type is insane, need to be reduced.

Eat Lead!!! Err....Antimatter...whatever!

Ganthrithor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#136 - 2013-11-08 16:08:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganthrithor
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Vesan Terakol wrote:
Wow, we're gonna have a legit MLRS - I've always loved those - a hail of destruction, rains on the head of your foes, then you pack and GTFO.
The quick unload/slow reload would force some new dynamics on the field. I imagine it like that - 4-5 of those warp in, unload all they got then disappear just as they came - would look awesome in small skirmishes.



You mean you will fire a volley that will make your enemy angry but not where close to be in danger of death... and then you will run away?

Not very efficient way of PVP


No, it will be more like ASBs: you'll fit them to suicide gimmick ships so that you can run into a gang, get tackled, kill a dictor or expensive frigate absurdly quickly, and then die in a fire since you'll be out of charges and still tackled. This has been CCP's new ideal for small gang / solo PvP for a while now :\
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#137 - 2013-11-08 16:11:30 UTC
I'm telling you guys.

Balance them by making them no longer have to reload.

They would be considered rapid, because they don't stop firing unless you swap ammo types.


You might think this would be afk mode, but considering you'd still have to activate them on different targets, that assumption would be incorrect.
Chessur
Fweddit
Free Range Chikuns
#138 - 2013-11-08 16:12:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Chessur
A 40 second reload choice is unplayable. The only reason why RLM's are use don every ship, is because the balance team in its infinite wisdom nerfed HML's into the ground. HAM's have always had horrible DPS application. Those systems are simply unplayable, so people were forced into RLMs.

Currently the RHML you have proposed, is just HML's that shoot slightly faster- with no added velocity / application bonus. This means that RHML's are bad, and will continue to be sub par to cruise missiles due to the inherent weakness built into the ammo, thanks to your previous round of 'balancing.'

RLML's with a 40 second reload time is simply going to be suicide. Small gang or solo pilots will not be able to fly these ships, due to the fact- that in those kind of PvP situations 40 seconds is an eternity. Not being able to shoot anything, and being at a large risk of becoming tackled from light ships with out the inability to shoot back is really poor game design.

Giving RLML's and RHMLs this option is not providing any meaning full alternative to game play/

As it stands now, if this horrible idea goes through- the only way to play with these ships would be this:

Split your weapon stack into two equal groups. Group A starting shooting, and once A is on reload- begin shooting group B. That way you can at least be doing some DPS during your eternity of a reload. The flaws in this game play design are as follows:

1. It is not intuitive to younger players
2. Doesn't open up any additional options, other than making a ship have anemic DPS, with the innability to change missile type or ammo type mid battle
3. Does not provide a realistic alternative to HMLs / HAM's as a usable weapon system

RLM's and cruise are the only missiles systems that are working (kind of) in the current PvP meta. Don't take away more Missiles with a rashly proposed design idea, with little to no community feed back- and force it into a new expansion.

This is a horrible change, and I feel that if you were wanting to make changes to RLML, make HML and HAM missiles usable. Then RHML's might actually have some use in game, and you can have an alternative to RLML's.
AskariRising
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#139 - 2013-11-08 16:13:59 UTC
can we get rapid cruise launchers? :)
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#140 - 2013-11-08 16:14:13 UTC
The reload time is an absolutely terrible idea. Missiles are 100% damage type specific. Reloading to change damage type is already slow at 10 seconds. Now it will not even be an option. There is no way to compensate for this without reconsidering the bonuses on every ships that these launchers could possibly be mounted on. The can of worms that you are attempting to open is too large to be handled safely.

At the very least keep RLMLs the same. They are not in need of changes.


http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY