These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Rapid Missile Update

First post First post
Author
Maxor Swift
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#381 - 2014-01-29 22:01:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Maxor Swift
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Here's an abstract idea for missiles… The biggest problem is the time to hit and that they don't apply instant damage. So why not turn them into the ultimate mid-range weapon system instead of trying to be the jack of all trades? Reduce flight time by 80%, increase missile velocity by 50% and tweak the damage application on heavy missiles and heavy assault missiles.


Something like this, to reduce lag have them be on field for less time. Reminds me of the old missile defence system that could launch a missile to instance supersonic velocities.


I dont see why they have to exist in game at all .Simply have them hit instantly and have the "missile effect" and time to hit be a purely cosmetic effect with a delayed result.

"What you talking about willis"

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#382 - 2014-01-29 22:35:01 UTC
Maxor Swift wrote:
I dont see why they have to exist in game at all. Simply have them hit instantly and have the "missile effect" and time to hit be a purely cosmetic effect with a delayed result.

An instant-hit weapon system that never misses. That should go over well… Besides, I like my smoke trails.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#383 - 2014-01-29 23:55:45 UTC
tiberiusric wrote:
I must agree with alot of people the 35second reload time, just immediately stops me even bothering with these. They are pretty unviable item in pvp or pve. They are gank tool and thats it. The normal reload time is painful enough as it is.


Well as I have said before they also are a very good option for the otherwise useless missile hardpoints on turret bonused boats and possibly on drone boats with launchers like the Prophecy or Arbitrator. That limited application still does not justify a whole unique weapon system though.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#384 - 2014-01-30 00:08:09 UTC
Hasikan Miallok wrote:
Well as I have said before they also are a very good option for the otherwise useless missile hardpoints on turret bonused boats and possibly on drone boats with launchers like the Prophecy or Arbitrator. That limited application still does not justify a whole unique weapon system though.

Yep, they're great on the Prophecy for anti-frigate duty. They're even fairly effective against interceptors.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Phaade
LowKey Ops
Snuffed Out
#385 - 2014-01-30 00:33:45 UTC
Baahahahahahaha!

You added TWO missiles and dropped the reload speed FIVE seconds?

C'mon guys, I love the work in this patch, but do you really think these minute changes will make RLMs or RHMs viable?

Try 20 missiles with a 20 second reload, or 30 missiles with a 30 second reload...and even then they still might be bad.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#386 - 2014-01-30 00:37:58 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Baahahahahahaha! You added TWO missiles and dropped the reload speed FIVE seconds?

C'mon guys, I love the work in this patch, but do you really think these minute changes will make RLMs or RHMs viable? Try 20 missiles with a 20 second reload, or 30 missiles with a 30 second reload...and even then they still might be bad.

Read my post-Rubicon 1.1 assessment. Some launchers got +3 missiles, and combined with the reload reduction it actually translates into a +20% overall damage increase for most of the T1 launchers (less for T2 and Faction).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#387 - 2014-01-30 04:02:31 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Baahahahahahaha!

You added TWO missiles and dropped the reload speed FIVE seconds?

C'mon guys, I love the work in this patch, but do you really think these minute changes will make RLMs or RHMs viable?

Try 20 missiles with a 20 second reload, or 30 missiles with a 30 second reload...and even then they still might be bad.


wtf are you talking about? whoa did they really do that ? lmfao. Im convinced that they honestly dgaf.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#388 - 2014-01-30 06:36:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Interesting RLML update...

Thrasher Threesome
I stumbled into a insta-lock Thrasher gatecamp, and managed to take out two with the third into hull before it escaped. This was with a single clip using the Arbalest RLMLs. Unrelated, I was later out in a HML fit and got jumped by a Crow, Sentinel and Cynabal. I managed to take out the Crow and Sentinel with precisions and put the Cynabal into armor - but not before a Falcon showed up and ruined the fun. I was then dog piled by an Enyo, Vexor, Ishtar, Malediction and Machariel. I switched to FoFs but at this point they could only randomly hit the swarm of drones. Basically, if you find yourself having to switch to FoFs - you're already dead...

Rapiered and Vexed
While in low-sec a Rapier Force Recon dropped and put the screws to me. I'd previously swapped out two of my kinetic RLML launchers to explosive prior after picking up an Enyo in the system, so as it turned out I had an ideal load-out. The Rapier employed dual webs and disruptors, so while the MWD gave me some limited maneuverability I clearly wasn't going anywhere. I had him into armor when a Navy Vexor showed up to reinforce and hit me with another web and disruptor, which made it easier for his complement of Ogres to make some headway. With the RLMLs I was able to destroy the Hobgoblins from the Rapier and then focus on the Vexor's Ogres. He tried retrieving a few but was only marginally successful, saving perhaps one. With the temporary reprieve from the Ogres I refocused my attention on the Rapier and finished it off. The Vexor had regrouped and sent several flights of Warriors, but the RLMLs destroyed or drove them all off. With my shields dangerously in the red at this point, I used the opportunity to overheat the MWD, escape disruptor/web range and reload. I re-engaged but he jumped out and I decided to call it a night.

This was my first head-to-head with RLMLs against cruisers, and I'm fairly psyched with how well they did. The extra ammunition and 5 seconds off the reload actually made a *big* difference in this particular battle. I think the total number of reloads was in the 3-4 range. While you're not going to necessarily take out a cruiser in a single clip, RLMLs are proving to be ideal against drone-based ships - which seem to be all the rage right now. With the recent drone omni and shield recharge nerfs, RLMLs are more effective than ever. Where RLMLs really shine is in those situations where you get ganged or tackled by smaller ships. I've racked up two interceptor kills to RLMLs, and I think the unfortunate owners were just as surprised as I was.
.....

CCP Rise, I hope this is the kind of feedback you were after. Ideally, if we could get the reload down to 30-seconds and come up with an ammo swap solution this would probably balance things out nicely. The previous suggestion I'd made for ammo swaps was to make it instantaneous - but only replace the current ammo quantity. So if you had 5 missiles remaining you'd only get 5 of the new type with a swap. This would prevent abuse with a standard reload (since you could just keep switching types to get around the 35-second reload), and wouldn't penalize you at the start of an engagement for having the wrong ammo pre-loaded (since you could instantly swap it out).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#389 - 2014-01-30 08:16:53 UTC
What hull were you in Arthur?

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Vinyl 41
AdVictis
#390 - 2014-01-30 09:03:37 UTC
prolly tengu since i doubt any t1 cruiser hull would be able to live thru all that
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#391 - 2014-01-30 09:28:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
What hull were you in Arthur?

Covert Tengu.

Vinyl 41 wrote:
prolly tengu since i doubt any t1 cruiser hull would be able to live thru all that

Yeah, it would've been tough just against the Rapier with a T1 hull. A Cerberus would've been really interesting what with the extended range and increased damage.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#392 - 2014-01-30 09:36:23 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
What hull were you in Arthur?

Covert Tengu.

Vinyl 41 wrote:
prolly tengu since i doubt any t1 cruiser hull would be able to live thru all that

Yeah, it would've been tough just against the Rapier with a T1 hull.


Have you considered a dual-asb tengu? The one I use has happily tanked 5 dps battlecruisers with a little bit of overheat on the invulnerability fields.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#393 - 2014-01-30 09:51:33 UTC
Although I sencerly hope this module works now.

I'm a bit sceptic on considering the module fixed because it works on a Tengu.

Even HML's still sort of work on a Tengu.

I also get it's a nice side weapon on a turret ship.


any tries on non T3 hulls and succes on other fields than ganking?



Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#394 - 2014-01-30 10:33:11 UTC
Vinyl 41 wrote:
prolly tengu since i doubt any t1 cruiser hull would be able to live thru all that
Tengu is his fav hull. Sadly this is exactly the type of feedback Rise is looking for. It will without proper investigation show RLML are in an ok place.



I'm not exactly sure what happened but the kill board shows; a little over 1.2 bil in losses (3 dead Tengus) to kill, 2 Thrashers a Crow and a Sentinel.

No offence Arthur, (I like many appreciate the work you have put in on RLML and trying to make them work) But this is not a glowing way to show - "look RLML work" .

I wonder, if the Tengu didn't have 200mil faction fit. Would it have had the same "success" (for want of a better word, it did kill 2 destroyers before turning up its own toes)

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.

Aducat Ragnarson
Blootered Bastards
#395 - 2014-01-30 10:33:59 UTC
A few friends of mine tested the rlmls on caracals for very small gang pvp. 2-4 caracals roaming 0.0.
Scenario:
You stir up a few people living in a deadend pocket.
You warp around that pocket staying out of real danger, and as soon as one of the guys in the defense fleet overcommits you bash their skull in in seconds.
So basically it works great as anti tackle in kiting setups and even cruisers die pretty fast to 4x4 rlml on caracals. The reload time is no problem either as tackle dies in 2-4 volleys and cruisers in 10-15. Then just warp out and/or reposition during the reload.
I would also say that the current fad of flying interceptors gives the rlml a good opportunity to shine.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#396 - 2014-01-30 14:39:15 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Have you considered a dual-asb tengu? The one I use has happily tanked 5 dps battlecruisers with a little bit of overheat on the invulnerability fields.

I am, actually. I wouldn't mind checking out your fit if you could email me the details…

Mike Whiite wrote:
I'm a bit sceptic on considering the module fixed because it works on a Tengu.

As indicated, there are limits to the application - and I do think a few additional tweaks are warranted. A Force Recon and Navy Vexor aren't exactly cheap ships, either.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Tengu is his fav hull. Sadly this is exactly the type of feedback Rise is looking for. It will without proper investigation show RLML are in an ok place. I'm not exactly sure what happened but the kill board shows; a little over 1.2 bil in losses (3 dead Tengus) to kill, 2 Thrashers a Crow and a Sentinel.

It's all about return on investment: the Tengus have all paid for themselves several times over.

Quote:
No offence Arthur, (I like many appreciate the work you have put in on RLML and trying to make them work) But this is not a glowing way to show - "look RLML work" . I wonder, if the Tengu didn't have 200mil faction fit. Would it have had the same "success" (for want of a better word, it did kill 2 destroyers before turning up its own toes)

I wouldn't necessarily say RLMLs "work" in every scenario; for my particular application they do, mainly because the biggest threat I face is from fast tacklers and drones. You don't necessarily need a blingy fit - T2 will suffice in a lot of instances.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#397 - 2014-01-30 18:34:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Vincintius Agrippa wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:



Personally I would not like to see dual 150S changed, they work quite well as is on my Arazu..

Ok, I'm going to contradict myself here, maybe Recons could be a ship type to benefit from a burst weapon. Scan, get a warpin, decloak, light cyno, apply burst damage while awaiting blops to do their thing.
Handy if your targeting small gangs where the burst damage can start to deal with tackle before the rest of your fleet arrives.

I think like Catherine Laartii, the current dual weapon turrets, modified to use small and medium ammo accordingly would not make them OP but combined with the front loading burst application of damage, make them a viable weapon for shooting smaller targets.
Reduced ammunition capacity, improved tracking and last but by no means least, a 20 second reload (same as rlml, rhml should have).
Dual 180mm AutoCannon should also receive an optimal range bonus to keep it inline with other turrets in that class.

If we are to have Burst weapons in the game, spread the love and give them to all


There, see? It would be a reasonable idea to try for expanding these, both to medium AND large 'dual' weapons respectively. The issue I'm seeing here is that the reload timer would be extremely difficult to apply to lasers, since you know, you don't exactly need to reload them much.

For simplicity's sake, you could split up the rediculously long reload timer with the miniature 5-10 second ones and have a severely reduced capacity; a true 'burst' weapon. You could also fix the in-game mechanics to have your ship keep firing its weapons after reloading. Lasers could fix this by having a mechanic for ALL the burst weapons to build up heat, but hit the reload timer as a built-in function to avoid taking heat damage for such high sustained dps(instead of reloading, they'd use the same crystal, and if it was faction or t2, burn out after the normal number of uses).

Spreading the dps out like that over time I think would be an appropriate way to balance the problem highlighted earlier with having it spread out appropriately in tiny clips with small reload timers; I think this would more importantly solve the issue these weapons have against active tanked targets(pvp and pve respectively). How's that sound for a solution?



I like this idea, to a point. The Medium dual versions should have S ammo, and have smaller sigs. However, ther should not be a reload time increase, they are fine as is.up to a certain point though, I usually equip the midrange turrets as they have good tracking while still having great dps. The S ammo should be limited to the smallest caliber turrets. Bring back normal rlml's and have a secondary launcher or firing mode that operates as the new launcher does. Just an idea.


And a good one at that. The extra reload or 'burst' was to highlight the dps issue they had over time; it was mostly just a balancing idea, as was implied the smaller sig, so that's basically what I had in mind too, but didn't clearly elaborate on it. Thank you for bringing that up.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#398 - 2014-01-31 02:18:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Another roam, another RLML update...

Vexed Again
What is it with Vexors anyway? One catches up to me, points and drops a flight of Valkyries while he calls in reinforcements. I quickly turned, lit him up with a web and scram and dispatched the Valkyries. A Sentinel, Merlin, Incursus and Crow had jumped in and were quickly burning to the fight. I was hit with various points and neuts, but focused my attention on the Vexor which went down extremely quickly (a second flight of Hobgoblins had no effect). I turned my attention to the Sentinel and he realized too late what I had for armament; his effort to pull range was unfortunately in vain. The Merlin and Incursus only lasted a few volleys, and in the heat of battle I lost track of the Crow (assume he managed to get out). I started with a kinetic and EM load-out and only reloaded a grand total of one time (I opted to swap the EM out for full kinetic after the Vexor).

My ship of choice was again a Tengu with a modified fit - one that actually worked out surprisingly well. In the interest of full disclosure, some of the victims took NPC damage - but not nearly as much as I did (I more or less absorbed the bulk of it). This was quite an enjoyable fight despite being outnumbered 5:1. My opponents were really good sports and relayed that "they had to go for it, even though they weren't entirely optimistic about their chances.

Addendum: They later organized several fire teams and went well out of their way to chase me all throughout low-sec.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Vinyl 41
AdVictis
#399 - 2014-01-31 05:08:32 UTC
and once again we got tengu'd - anyway such posts actually make it look like this whole rebalance was a complete succes and that even the sceptical people are adapting to it Ugh
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#400 - 2014-01-31 05:16:34 UTC
Vinyl 41 wrote:
and once again we got tengu'd - anyway such posts actually make it look like this whole rebalance was a complete succes and that even the sceptical people are adapting to it Ugh

No worries, I'll let someone else pickup the torch...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.