These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1921 - 2013-11-20 18:52:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
Rapid Missile Launcher Issues and Fix

Take this hair-brained scheme elsewhere.
No one wants to use rockets and heavy assault missiles in place of light and heavy missiles, forfeit the training they already have and then require two SP trees for a single weapon system. Stop spamming this thread and the rest of the forums.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Thaddeus Eggeras
Urkrathos Corp
#1922 - 2013-11-20 19:00:32 UTC
Well to tell you the truth a lot of people think like this or very similiar, it was pointed out by others in this fourm, other fourms and on SiSi. People who aren't just trying to have an OP weapon understand that something like this will need to happen to REALLY fix them OR they stay 40secs reload. I'll take small nerfs to make a weapon system do what it is suppose to really do over a nerf that completely ruined said weapon system.
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1923 - 2013-11-20 19:02:14 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
Rapid Missile Launcher Issues and Fix

Stop spamming this thread and the rest of the forums.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1924 - 2013-11-20 19:02:27 UTC
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
Well to tell you the truth a lot of people think like this or very similiar...

Sure. Unless you have something else to offer, this will be my last comment on this idea.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1925 - 2013-11-20 19:03:49 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
Rapid Missile Launcher Issues and Fix

Take this hair-brained scheme elsewhere.
No one wants to use rockets and heavy assault missiles in place of light and heavy missiles, forfeit the training they already have and then require two SP trees for a single weapon system. Stop spamming this thread and the rest of the forums.


Just because you don't like it doesn't mean others would be open to the idea. Why are you scared of him posting a solution to this? If you have an idea by all means post it too. The forms are about sharing ideas so be helpful and share yours. Trolling others while sometimes fun doesn't really help in this case.
Benedictus de Suede
Norsewing Naval Command
#1926 - 2013-11-20 19:04:01 UTC
What´s Op in this game are guns. Let´s be objective about it and look at the stats on the killboards. Missiles need a buff!

RHML, just tested it, are really fun and effective when they are shooting, but the reload time is simply boooooring and make no sence what´s so ever. It´s like a Ferrari with a 1 litre gastank.

Cut the reload time to max 20 sec and increase the number of charges to the to the double.

All missiles, in general, should be buffed but...all ships should also have the ability to use defensive countermeasures like "new" def. slots for defender gatling guns or defender missiles. Who uses defender missiles today? All real weapon systems need constant "buffing" it´s an evolution process where different system compete against each other. It´s time for the missiles to catch up...
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1927 - 2013-11-20 19:08:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Benedictus de Suede wrote:
RHML, just tested it, are really fun and effective when they are shooting, but the reload time is simply boooooring and make no sence what´s so ever. It´s like a Ferrari with a 1 litre gastank.

Cut the reload time to max 20 sec and increase the number of charges to the to the double.

All missiles, in general, should be buffed but...all ships should also have the ability to use defensive countermeasures like "new" def. slots for defender gatling guns or defender missiles. Who uses defender missiles today? All real weapon systems need constant "buffing" it´s an evolution process where different system compete against each other. It´s time for the missiles to catch up...

RHMLs are pretty well-tuned (even with the 40-second reload time). I run several ships, so in fairness I don't notice it as much (it gives me time to focus on the other ships). I wouldn't mind seeing a slight bump in ammunition, but I'm running Faction so that does give me a few more rounds at least. I was going to try my RLMLs, but they all sold at Jita (so I guess there are some fans of the new changes). Yes, agreed - missiles need an overhaul in general.

IIshira wrote:
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean others would be open to the idea. Why are you scared of him posting a solution to this? If you have an idea by all means post it too. The forms are about sharing ideas so be helpful and share yours. Trolling others while sometimes fun doesn't really help in this case.

It's not a solution - it's an abomination. There are several posts dedicated to why this is an extremely bad idea, but here's the short version: You invalidate your training for light and heavy missiles, you now require two (2) different skill trees for each weapon system to utilize it, you have to train rockets and heavy assault missiles, you take a huge DPS hit and you sacrifice the majorty of your range for slightly better damage application.

So please, by all means - do tell us why this is a great idea...Roll

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Thaddeus Eggeras
Urkrathos Corp
#1928 - 2013-11-20 19:14:33 UTC
I agree missiles need looked at, but 40secs reload, that isn't a fix, that is killing a weapon system. The issues with RLMLs were plain to see, and that is why they were nerfed. Now the nerf that happened is BS, but I think because of this nerd ALL missiles will get relooked at, and hopefully HAMs will get their explosion radius and explosion velocity slight buffed, HMLs get fully re looked at, defenders get replaced by flares, and FoF no idea but fix them.

You also have to remember some people enjoy having overpowered weapon systems, makes the game not as much of a challenge, and would rather argue then even try to change something so it works like it should. Oh well some people are well cancers, it's just how the world works.

I explained what was wrong with rapids, and ways to fix the issues, sorry you will have to train more then 1 or 2 weapon systems, that's EVE.
Thaddeus Eggeras
Urkrathos Corp
#1929 - 2013-11-20 19:25:50 UTC
[quote ]It's not a solution - it's an abomination. There are several posts dedicated to why this is an extremely bad idea, but here's the short version: You invalidate your training for light and heavy missiles, you now require two (2) different skill trees for each weapon system to utilize it, you have to train rockets and heavy assault missiles, you take a huge DPS hit and you sacrifice the majorty of your range for slightly better damage application.[/quote]

Thanks for completely proven my point. It isn't that my idea is bad, it's that you just can't believe you'd have to train a couple new weapon systems. What do you think EVER missile pilot had to do after they nerfed HMLs? Yep train other weapon systems. Deal with it, it's its OP which rapids were you are going to have to move on.
And you don't take any DPS hit, if anything you will do more DPS, just you will have to wait for your target to get closer. 10km to 30km with rapid rocket launchers and 20km to 40km with rapid heavy assault missile launchers. Oh no you mean I have to wait for my target to be in or near disruptor range to kill them, how unfair. Truth be told these would do more damage, just won't allow you to nail stuff anywhere between 500 meter to 50km out. Meaning it won't allow you to do what the other 2 weapons in the same size group do but with one weapon system. How dare I take your OP idea from you. You poor thing. Lsten up, either learn that this is EVE, not WOW, not GWs, etc and adapt to how things happen or move to a game where everything is sunshine and rainbows. And learing rockets and HAms really isn't that bad or long, stop whining.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#1930 - 2013-11-20 19:53:08 UTC
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
I agree missiles need looked at, but 40secs reload, that isn't a fix, that is killing a weapon system. The issues with RLMLs were plain to see, and that is why they were nerfed. Now the nerf that happened is BS, but I think because of this nerd ALL missiles will get relooked at, and hopefully HAMs will get their explosion radius and explosion velocity slight buffed, HMLs get fully re looked at, defenders get replaced by flares, and FoF no idea but fix them.

You also have to remember some people enjoy having overpowered weapon systems, makes the game not as much of a challenge, and would rather argue then even try to change something so it works like it should. Oh well some people are well cancers, it's just how the world works.

I explained what was wrong with rapids, and ways to fix the issues, sorry you will have to train more then 1 or 2 weapon systems, that's EVE.


Maybe you don't have reading at V yet and I understand that is a rank 25 skill and takes while to skill to level 5.

For the sake of all megacorporations, stop posting until you have reading at level 5.

I already said that assault missile launchers, that are now call rapid light missile launchers didn't have any problem whatsoever until the cruiser rebalence.

To anyones total surpise, people started using light missiles for pvp the first time in about six years.

Nobody in six years ever, neither victim or victor, ever complained about it, at all.

CCP concluded, it must be op. It wasn't. Period.

Yet there are special snowflakes that are still whining that a missiles used to hit a target and destroy it in the process and cried for nerfes.

No turrets in zee game could ever shoot a smaller target and destroy it-
wait, there is Shocked, whaat?

People are less complaining about that issue, so it is okay for a cannon to haz 3 billionz of alpha damage.
Why complain, just train w(h)in(e)matar(d).
(They require the least amount of any resemblence of intelligence or skill)

Back to zee solo-bbq-omg-pwn light missile.

Is zee long(er) range missile for frigates, destroyers and some cruisers (oh nooooooeeees).

People figured out (after only six years) you can kill stuff if you keep fireing long enough until your target explodes, even with a light missile.
This totally new idea of a missile used in pvp can not be allowed by any means.

So somebody call 911, CIA, NSA, Homeland Security, zee National Guard, zee Ghost Busters, everyone.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Thaddeus Eggeras
Urkrathos Corp
#1931 - 2013-11-20 20:04:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Thaddeus Eggeras
Hey dumbass, this wasn't all to you, so you should probably learn to read too big tough guy, talking **** through a computer haha. I know you think you are special, but your kind of special you might not want to be proud about.

Also light missiles got buffed, hints why people started using rapids again, again learn to read up before talking.

Really NO turret can alpha smaller targets? Odd I have seen Tornados, Oracles, Machs, and etc alpha frigates, destroyers and rock cruisers in 2 or 3 shocks pretty damn easy. No missiles have ever been able to alpha though. Issue with RLMLs is they did what the other 2 launchers did in one and also out performed medium guns, in being about to rock smaller targets from 500 meters to 40km or 50km easy, and rocking ships cruisers size also and usually BC too. And because RLMLs had so low of CPU and PG you could fit dual XLASBs on the Cerb, and Large on Caracels with no issue. So before you decide to insult people and talk **** learn to read and understand not everything is to just you. And also that what you are saying like others who just want their amazing OP launchers back, is complete bullshit. If you would have read through this fourm you would have seen that, and the reason for it. Same with testing on SiSi and talks before the patch even dealing with RLMLs. But I'll just explain it all to you again so you know. Read slow, don't want you to hurt yourself.

1. They have amazing range, with the ability to do what close range guns and missiles and long range guns and missiles do in one.
2. Rapid launchers take far less CPU and PG than their counterparts, which in turn makes the ships using them have amazing tanks.
3. They are a weapon system designed to work against smaller targets, while they do this; they also work just as well against targets of the same size, and sometimes even larger targets.

But hey enjoy those new 40secs rapids, I'm sure they are amazing huh.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#1932 - 2013-11-20 20:50:58 UTC
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:


-stuff that maybe subject of rule violation-

1. They have amazing range, with the ability to do what close range guns and missiles and long range guns and missiles do in one.
2. Rapid launchers take far less CPU and PG than their counterparts, which in turn makes the ships using them have amazing tanks.
3. They are a weapon system designed to work against smaller targets, while they do this; they also work just as well against targets of the same size, and sometimes even larger targets.

But hey enjoy those new 40secs rapids, I'm sure they are amazing huh.


I am not really sure what you are rambeling about..

But let's get something straight here, no missile launcher has a range attribute.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1933 - 2013-11-20 21:09:17 UTC
Well I'm having a blast in my Belicose with these things... It's ******* hilarious. The action is quite fast paced and I don't even seem to notice 40 seconds pass.


These weapons are ******* brilliant.


Can I has a Laser version of these please? Say those Quad Light Beam Lasers look like they could do with some thing like this. Just make them require a special Crystal ammo that works like normal ammo. Then those weapons would be fun too!!!
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1934 - 2013-11-20 21:10:23 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Well I'm having a blast in my Belicose with these things... It's ******* hilarious. The action is quite fast paced and I don't even seem to notice 40 seconds pass.

If you really want to try something for sh*ts and giggles, use FoF missiles. Lol

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#1935 - 2013-11-20 21:46:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Bouh Revetoile
elitatwo wrote:
Nobody in six years ever, neither victim or victor, ever complained about it, at all.
Light missiles are OP since the buff they received with the HML nerf. Some people, including me, pointed out at this time that they would most probably be OP.

RLML were discussed during the T1 cruiser rebalance where they were deemed a potential threat to destroyer, taking their role as anti-frigate weapon.

And what have we today ? Kestrel, Condor, Hookbill, Talwar (completely overshadowing Corax), Hawk, Caracal, Cerberus, and in a lesser extent the minmatar missile ships (but the lack of projection bonus put them more at risk ; Talwar being the exeption) all are OP with light missiles.

Light missiles frigates completely out range and out dps any turret frigate at almost all ranges (exactly like HML were when they were nerfed) and RLML cruisers are just plain better at killing frigates than any destroyer. They are OP. You just didn't listen to those alerting about it.

In fact, light missiles should have the buff they received completely revert, bar maybe the fitting buff LML received.

And before anyone cry, yes, HML should have been reviewed when medium LR turrets were buffed.

HAM are fine though, they also received a buff when HML were nerfed, but missiles users just appear to be completely terrorised by the idea of going to "short" range, and the discussions here prove it one more time.

PS : and to not forget anything on the subject, I think cruise missiles are OP, overshadowing torp in most case and their versatility compensating for the few cases torps are good, unless this is due again to the terror missile ship pilots feel at going too close. I don't really know about torp though, but I think they are not bad at all considering their range and damage. Again, caldari pilots don't like to sacrifice tank for tackle which require to go too close.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1936 - 2013-11-20 21:57:04 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
HAM are fine though, they also received a buff when HML were nerfed, but missiles users just appear to be completely terrorised by the idea of going to "short" range, and the discussions here prove it one more time.

Not in the least. But if I wanted a short-range missile system, I'd go with heavy assault missile launchers. You do have a valid point about torpedoes; I wouldn't mind seeing them with an insane missile velocity with slightly more range and damage. As the 'HAM' equivalent, they should be faster than cruise missiles.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#1937 - 2013-11-20 22:28:05 UTC
IIshira wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:
Rapid Missile Launcher Issues and Fix

Take this hair-brained scheme elsewhere.
No one wants to use rockets and heavy assault missiles in place of light and heavy missiles, forfeit the training they already have and then require two SP trees for a single weapon system. Stop spamming this thread and the rest of the forums.


Just because you don't like it doesn't mean others would be open to the idea. Why are you scared of him posting a solution to this? If you have an idea by all means post it too. The forms are about sharing ideas so be helpful and share yours. Trolling others while sometimes fun doesn't really help in this case.


Well for me, it's because he thinks 200dps is worse than 150dps

Linky: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3891003#post3891003

Actually starts from page 1...but that link is a decent short cut

Reaaaaaaally to take it seriously after that.

But that's just me Smile
Kirren D'marr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1938 - 2013-11-20 22:40:04 UTC
Regardless of individual opinions on this change to RMLs, I think it can be agreed upon that this situation would have been greatly improved by having a reasonable amount of time to review these changes on the test server first. I think this whole thread highlights a serious deficiency in CCP's development process: pushing a significant change to game mechanics without giving enough time for players to test the change and give proper feedback.

If you agree with this idea, I would ask you to voice your support in this CSM proposal thread: [Proposal] Minimum time on test server for mechanics changes before going live

If you disagree, I'd be curious to hear your arguments as well. No matter which side of an issue you are on, I have to beleive that more data is a good thing!

Why a switch on/off? Because the new animation doesn't add anything to gameplay and it's graphically annoying. In other words, it's worse than bad: it's useless. Simple as that.     _ - Kina Ayami_
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1939 - 2013-11-20 23:33:59 UTC
Kirren D'marr wrote:
If you agree with this idea, I would ask you to voice your support in this CSM proposal thread: [Proposal] Minimum time on test server for mechanics changes before going live

I agree, and I have.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Thaddeus Eggeras
Urkrathos Corp
#1940 - 2013-11-20 23:37:21 UTC
Again with the DPS, in combat there are many other factors then just DPS, and with RLMLs compared to HAMs it isn't just DPS, it's also explosion radius, explosion velocity, resist, ships signature radius, and speed etc etc. Point is HAMs rarely perform as good against cruisers as RLMLs did, well besides faction cruisers. And HAMs never perform as well against smaller targets as RLML do. Also because RLMLs take little of the CPU and PG that HAMs do; ships using them can put on amazing tank, where HAM ships can't. And as light missiles have been buffed, RLMLs were to choice for cruise size ships BECAUSE they worked so great against frigates, destroyers, cruisers and even did well again BCs. There is a reason why RLMLs were the choice for low sec and 0.0, they are for MANY reasons the best choice. Now they are worthless. But like I have told the OP lovers, keep going against what is shown, what has been shown to be an OP issue, and look now we have 40secs reload time. No matter what ALL your argues are, I prove you're reasons as either selfish, BS, or huh. Rapids were OP, and now are broken.
To fix them we can't go back to what they were and hope it fixes it, because it won't. First rapids need fully relooked at. And I have put out good lines to show the issues and to show how to fix said issues, like it or not, I have done more then the rest of you put together. I have tested them against HAMs to show they are on line and in some cases better then HAMs against cruisers, I have put out ways to fix this REALLY fix it. And all I hear is one "I don't want my skills to be lost" which they already are, 2 "DPS proves all", which it doesn't, it only shows a small part of what happens in combat, and 3 "trolling" so either help me fix them or shut up.