Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 138 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage Fidelas Constans
133
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 06:52:00 -
[1651] - Quote
I demand that rlml be modified to firing more than 1 charge at a time. The ability lies in the background code so let's finally have a weapon that can. I'm thinking of srm from mech warrior games right now Click here for LP store weapon cost rebalancing |
Yummy Chocolate
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2483
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 07:23:00 -
[1652] - Quote
40 seconds reload time is way too much for any weapon.
60 seconds reload time for ASBs is fine. but for a weapon with as little as 23 charges, a reload time of 40 seconds is a nerf to the point of being almost completely useless. Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase Felicity Love >... was thinking "moar popcorn"... but now, seeing the truly awesome contribution this thread is going to make to the Greater Glory Of EVE.... imagonnamakkadapizza.... |
Ziraili Onzo
Yggdrasil Woodchoppers Noir. Mercenary Group
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 07:28:00 -
[1653] - Quote
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 How about a mechanic that would somewhat split the reload timer into two parts..
First you have a "heat-timer", that starts after your last fired shot. Once that timer is over, you can start the actual reloading cycle, with timer being the same as it is right now (short duration).
The sum of these timers could be in the range that Rubicon-version is, but the main idea is that it wouldnt take away the key attribute missiles have with quickly changing damage types. But it still leaves the door open for that "new decition-making" that you want with this burst-model for dps. If you commit to a fight with a certain damage-type, your getting the full reload cycle if said fight last longer than one reload. If your just landing on grid with someone, but still havent fired your first shot, you can quickly change the ammo type, since your "heat-timer" is most likely already done coming out of your warp..
This could also blend in with the warpspeed-changes somewhat. If your fighting at a gate, bounce up to a tac, and then down again (cancelling gateguns?), with that warp being alot quicker, you might not be able to reload right away since the warp is over so quick.. A good call might however be to warp off, wait until you could start the actual reload-cycle, and then warp back down to gate, giving you the choice to a: get back into the fight asap to get points, or b: be able to not get into the fight until you got a better damagetype
As for lore, you could say that with the rapid version launchers, your firing missiles at almost double the rate of fire, and your launchers need some time to cool down before your next firing-cycle, or else the missile-tubes is gonna crack or something :P |
Elisk Skyforge
Touring New Eden Haven.
9
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 10:47:00 -
[1654] - Quote
RLML and RHML should be given two firing modes switchable in space. "Burst mode" commonly used by ccp rise and "regular mode" used by others. I think I broke your game CCP-->-áhttp://i.imgur.com/4pGZ5qJ.jpg?1 |
Roime
Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats
3664
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 11:13:00 -
[1655] - Quote
Ganthrithor wrote:Kara Trix wrote:It doesn't stop.... the nails I mean for CERB pilots.. (which I am one)
They changed the bonus on the CERBERUS as well to exclude Light Missiles for the ROF bonus.
So now it will no longer give a 5% percent bonus to all missiles ROF... only HAM,HML and RLML
Wow....... keep them coming. So we get ZERO damage bonus on Lights for flying this expensive HAC over a T1, only range?
Yup. Rise made a retardedly overpowered module, and now it's time for the special-casing so that only people who want to fly throwaway 30m isk ships can actually use the OP gear. Otherwise older players in real ships would be able to compete: we wouldn't want that. Same BS with AARs and ASBs: a tiny minority of skillful players used to use active armor / shield tanking with great success. CCP saw this going on, saw that mere mortals who either couldn't afford high-end modules or weren't skillful enough to manage cap injection cycles etc weren't able to use these tactics, so they cook up some 3m isk module that gives your terrible T1 ship the same tanking capability as some autist's two-billion isk cruiser, "but only for 50 seconds." Such a stupid idea. I suppose they'll be restricting RLMLs on the Tengu as well, since you'd have been able to do something like 650 dps with light missiles using them. I have an idea: how about you design balanced modules instead of pushing out overpowered bullshit and then restricting it to use on throwaway ships? Why should I play a game that's totally balanced in favor of people flying throwaway crap in a suicidal manner? Stop making cheap crap outperform things people have spent ages training + saving for.
What a bunch of ******** bullshit
Notify-á-á You cannot do that while warping. |
Yummy Chocolate
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2485
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 11:19:00 -
[1656] - Quote
Elisk Skyforge wrote:RLML and RHML should be given two firing modes switchable in space. "Burst mode" commonly used by ccp rise and "regular mode" used by everyone else. FTFY
also +1
also for every other module since CCP Rise loves Burst Mode. Frostys Virpio > CCP: Continously Crying Playerbase Felicity Love >... was thinking "moar popcorn"... but now, seeing the truly awesome contribution this thread is going to make to the Greater Glory Of EVE.... imagonnamakkadapizza.... |
Bouh Revetoile
TIPIAKS
426
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 13:01:00 -
[1657] - Quote
Anomaly One wrote:can't wait for people who don't visit the forums and use RLML in game compelling game play mechanic CCP! bravo! /slowclap People said that a lot in the past, and we are still waiting for the rage to come on the forums.
Hurricane nerf ; HML nerf ; TE nerf ; resist bonus nerf ; T1 Battleships ; T1 Battlecruisers ; ...
HAC where supposed to stay very bad too, and the MWD bonus to them completely useless.
"Incoming rage" is often the last desperate call of misery of angry people around here when they see trheir toys nerfed. It's quite funny in fact. :-) |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage Fidelas Constans
133
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 13:25:00 -
[1658] - Quote
I think we're seeing a tectonic shift in EVE design philosophy towards active tanking and away from fleet logi and their associated doctrines. Away from out-ranging your opponents and out EHPing them. Now it's going to be closer range battles where speed and capacitor discipline makes the difference more important. The focus on burst tanking and now burst DPS are perfectly complimentary to some kind of "all-or-nothing" type of ship design. That's not to say the RLML change is especially great but it makes sense to me and I can see why it's being done. Engagement ranges are being lowered and cap instability is being increased.
Expect during the recon/T3 rebalance pass to see the pilgrim/curse/legion get some serious neut range/amount bonuses and also see the rook possibly gain an active tanking bonus. It really wouldn't surprise me if the huginn got one too. Click here for LP store weapon cost rebalancing |
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
255
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 13:56:00 -
[1659] - Quote
I swear you guys get hired by CCP and you lose touch with the game. Whats in the punch bowl up there?
The smaller sized missile launchers on larger sized ships are used to outlast a larger number of smaller ships. Paper DPS doesnt matter here. Applied DPS does. Just reduce the damage of the missiles. If a caracal wants to use large DPS against similar or larger ships he'll go with HAMS over RLML. The same will go for the raven using cruise missiles over heavy (lets be honest... torps are still broken and suck no one with a brain will ever use them)
Now the big purpse of the smaller weapons system is to be able to dictate the engagement. Its not about raping frigates in 5 seconds with high DPS light missiles. Its about applying constant and reliable damage to smaller targets over time. Give me 200 DPS over 1 minute with a 10 seconds reload, over 400 DPS in 30 seconds with a 40 second reload. This way I can defend myself constantly and stay fighting.
You guys need to remember the old film saying..... "Sometimes less is more". You dont need to "fix" everything by adding features.... maybe just reduce some stats once in a while if you find they are working "too well".
The biggest thing to take away from this... Is that constant applied DPS over the entire engagement is what we need to fight outnumbered. We dont need omg uber DPS for 50 seconds, then omg im F****** cant do anything for 40 seconds while this merlin that just caught me kills me. Or in a way Kil2 can relate..... sweet my Armageddon does 2k DPS for 40 seconds! 40 seconds later after fighting a mega that died and a tempest...... okay mega down, reloading for 40 seconds.... omg a curse just landed I need to get him off the field..... oh **** I have to wait 40 seconds and sit here like a moron while the curse eats my cap and now my active tank dies to the tempest......... but if I had lower dps that was constant I could have forced the curse off and still fought the mega and tempest.
Wild |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
778
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 14:26:00 -
[1660] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:I swear you guys get hired by CCP and you lose touch with the game. Whats in the punch bowl up there?
The smaller sized missile launchers on larger sized ships are used to outlast a larger number of smaller ships. Paper DPS doesnt matter here. Applied DPS does. Just reduce the damage of the missiles. If a caracal wants to use large DPS against similar or larger ships he'll go with HAMS over RLML. The same will go for the raven using cruise missiles over heavy (lets be honest... torps are still broken and suck no one with a brain will ever use them)
Now the big purpse of the smaller weapons system is to be able to dictate the engagement. Its not about raping frigates in 5 seconds with high DPS light missiles. Its about applying constant and reliable damage to smaller targets over time. Give me 200 DPS over 1 minute with a 10 seconds reload, over 400 DPS in 30 seconds with a 40 second reload. This way I can defend myself constantly and stay fighting.
You guys need to remember the old film saying..... "Sometimes less is more". You dont need to "fix" everything by adding features.... maybe just reduce some stats once in a while if you find they are working "too well".
The biggest thing to take away from this... Is that constant applied DPS over the entire engagement is what we need to fight outnumbered. We dont need omg uber DPS for 50 seconds, then omg im F****** cant do anything for 40 seconds while this merlin that just caught me kills me. Or in a way Kil2 can relate..... sweet my Armageddon does 2k DPS for 40 seconds! 40 seconds later after fighting a mega that died and a tempest...... okay mega down, reloading for 40 seconds.... omg a curse just landed I need to get him off the field..... oh **** I have to wait 40 seconds and sit here like a moron while the curse eats my cap and now my active tank dies to the tempest......... but if I had lower dps that was constant I could have forced the curse off and still fought the mega and tempest.
Wild
Ok, now any of the smartasses defendign these changes want to come here and sy they know better than wildcat?
Both math and good pvpers atest how problematic this is. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
778
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 14:28:00 -
[1661] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:I think we're seeing a tectonic shift in EVE design philosophy towards active tanking and away from fleet logi and their associated doctrines. Away from out-ranging your opponents and out EHPing them. Now it's going to be closer range battles where speed and capacitor discipline makes the difference more important. The focus on burst tanking and now burst DPS are perfectly complimentary to some kind of "all-or-nothing" type of ship design. That's not to say the RLML change is especially great but it makes sense to me and I can see why it's being done. Engagement ranges are being lowered and cap instability is being increased.
Expect during the recon/T3 rebalance pass to see the pilgrim/curse/legion get some serious neut range/amount bonuses and also see the rook possibly gain an active tanking bonus. It really wouldn't surprise me if the huginn got one too.
you mena.. focusing on gallente? what a surprise considerign certain peopel involved :/ Jsut check the ammount of attention on the galeltne BS balance thread and the other 3... "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
mama guru
Thundercats The Initiative.
162
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 14:30:00 -
[1662] - Quote
Front loaded anti small weapons. Yes please.
These are not supposed to be main fleet weapons anyway. Don't really see a problem. ______
EVE online is the fishermans friend of MMO's. If it's too hard you are too weak. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
779
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 14:45:00 -
[1663] - Quote
mama guru wrote:Front loaded anti small weapons. Yes please.
These are not supposed to be main fleet weapons anyway. Don't really see a problem.
The problem is that THEY wil be good EXACLTY AT WHERE YOU SAID THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO.
They will be strong in fleets and weak solo. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1102
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 15:15:00 -
[1664] - Quote
DHB WildCat wrote:I swear you guys get hired by CCP and you lose touch with the game. Whats in the punch bowl up there?
The smaller sized missile launchers on larger sized ships are used to outlast a larger number of smaller ships. Paper DPS doesnt matter here. Applied DPS does. Just reduce the damage of the missiles. If a caracal wants to use large DPS against similar or larger ships he'll go with HAMS over RLML. The same will go for the raven using cruise missiles over heavy (lets be honest... torps are still broken and suck no one with a brain will ever use them)
Now the big purpse of the smaller weapons system is to be able to dictate the engagement. Its not about raping frigates in 5 seconds with high DPS light missiles. Its about applying constant and reliable damage to smaller targets over time. Give me 200 DPS over 1 minute with a 10 seconds reload, over 400 DPS in 30 seconds with a 40 second reload. This way I can defend myself constantly and stay fighting.
You guys need to remember the old film saying..... "Sometimes less is more". You dont need to "fix" everything by adding features.... maybe just reduce some stats once in a while if you find they are working "too well".
The biggest thing to take away from this... Is that constant applied DPS over the entire engagement is what we need to fight outnumbered. We dont need omg uber DPS for 50 seconds, then omg im F****** cant do anything for 40 seconds while this merlin that just caught me kills me. Or in a way Kil2 can relate..... sweet my Armageddon does 2k DPS for 40 seconds! 40 seconds later after fighting a mega that died and a tempest...... okay mega down, reloading for 40 seconds.... omg a curse just landed I need to get him off the field..... oh **** I have to wait 40 seconds and sit here like a moron while the curse eats my cap and now my active tank dies to the tempest......... but if I had lower dps that was constant I could have forced the curse off and still fought the mega and tempest.
Wild
It makes perfect sense to me and I'm not even that much of a PvPer. This might be the best post in this whole thread. |
Zircon Dasher
300
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 15:20:00 -
[1665] - Quote
It is unacceptable that missile users now have to make tradeoffs. Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
779
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 15:33:00 -
[1666] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:It is unacceptable that missile users now have to make tradeoffs.
If was a tradeoff would be ok. THe issue is.. its not a trade off. Frotn loaded DPS is an illusion. It sno where the same thing as alpha strike that is INSTATANEOUS, before ANY repair can be applied, before enemy can bug out. But rapids now have a larger tradeoff for that falacious frotn load damage, that is a larger reload time than 1400mm arties. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Zircon Dasher
300
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 15:55:00 -
[1667] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: If was a tradeoff would be ok. THe issue is.. its not a trade off. Frotn loaded DPS is an illusion. It sno where the same thing as alpha strike that is INSTATANEOUS, before ANY repair can be applied, before enemy can bug out. But rapids now have a larger tradeoff for that falacious frotn load damage, that is a larger reload time than 1400mm arties.
One day I mentioned to my wife (now ex) that I really liked the way that Chevy had restyled the front-end of their truck. She spent the next 20min ranting about how I was wrong because a hatchback could carry more than a Miata.
I like you. You remind me of her. Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
243
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 16:17:00 -
[1668] - Quote
40 second reload time is going to make them useless for anything but a specific squad to warp in, kill frigates, and warp out.
If they wanted to make a module specific for this purpose that would be a great idea but doing this to the RLML is just bad. |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
105
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 16:37:00 -
[1669] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:It is unacceptable that missile users now have to make tradeoffs.
40 seconds of 0 dps goes beyond tradeoff, especially with the warp speed changes coming on Tuesday. |
Thaddeus Eggeras
TwoTenX LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
81
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 17:23:00 -
[1670] - Quote
So are rapids OP, slightly, but to fix the range issues, explosion radius, explosion velocity, change rapids to HAMs and rockets, and add 2s to 3s to RofF compared to what heavy assault launcher and rocket launchers do now and everything is fixed. Their range is much less, explosion radius is more, explain velocity is less and taking a couple seconds from RofF will keep their DPS in check. Don't allow cruisers, BCs or BS to give their explosion bonuses to rapids. Also rockets still won't get the range or DPS HAMs would, and HAMs wouldn't get the DPS torps would, meaning rapids will be used mostly for smaller targets like they are suppose to be/ If adjusted right,it will work. See I fixed rapids
Or F it, and come out with a real new launcher type, might work too.
and only a couple with "good work on testing" F you all haha |
|
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
244
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 17:33:00 -
[1671] - Quote
Volstruis wrote:Sad and happy at the same time.
Rise is officially the anti-solo.
This makes me wonder how CCP's decision making process works. If one of the devs comes up with an idea does it go for a vote or they just let them run with it. I'm just wondering because I couldn't believe this passed any kind of vote or approval. |
CW Itovuo
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
9
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 18:17:00 -
[1672] - Quote
Will never use them. Reload time is stupid.
Can't see the point.
CCP turned the missile family upside down a year or so ago. HAM were seldom used, HML ruled. CCP get's to "fixing" and now we're in the exact opposite situation. HAMs are now the defacto choice, and HML are rarely if ever fielded.
Hooray "Balance"
Creating a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. |
Thaddeus Eggeras
TwoTenX LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
82
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 18:51:00 -
[1673] - Quote
Push the HAMs/Rocket rapids, I rather have that then 40sec reload, and it would fix the OP issue. tell CCP people! |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1104
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 19:39:00 -
[1674] - Quote
Zircon Dasher wrote:It is unacceptable that missile users now have to make tradeoffs. It is unacceptable that CCP sees fit to introduce new modules and completely redesign old modules without first conducting a thorough re-examination and rebalance of the ammunition, instead declaring that the modules in question are too popular even though it's the ammunition's inherent problems causing the perceived popularity.
If a thorough rockets-to-citadels re-investigation and rebalance of missile ammunition had been conducted prior to announcing RHMLs, I believe CCP would have been looking at a very different missile-usage landscape; one where there is room for old-style rapids to co-exist with their same-size less-rapid counterparts or even room for these new-style front-heavy rapids as other choices would be properly useful as well.
Instead, we got what we got. Oh well, right?
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote:Push the HAMs/Rocket rapids, I rather have that then 40sec reload, and it would fix the OP issue. tell CCP people! Perhaps I'm misunderstanding because your sentence is unclear and poorly written, but if you are suggesting that Rockets and HAMs should be converted to this ancillary business, then I would suggest that you cut off your hands and never post again. |
Thaddeus Eggeras
TwoTenX LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
82
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 19:48:00 -
[1675] - Quote
No i am saying replace lights and heavies with rockets and assault missiles, as that will clear up the issues that lights and heavies had for being OP. The OP issues seemed to be that they have great range, their explosion radius was too small and their explosion velocity was too high. With HAMs and rockets replacing them, their range would be cut down, their explosion radius is brought up and their explosion velocity was brought down. Then all they need is a couple seconds added to their RofF and cruisers, BCs and BSs not have thier explosions bonuses given the rapid launchers, and most of the OP issues are taken care of. Learn to read and you should have understood. And anytime youd'd like to cut my hands off, come on over and tell me how it works out for you haha. I am just trying to save rapids, because 40sec reload time will make them close to if not worthless.
This "should" make using rapids against smaller targets better, but also make using them against ships the same size or larger a bad idea. It would need to be tested on sisi and I'm sure tweaked, but it's a better option then 40sec reload. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd CAStabouts
1106
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 20:01:00 -
[1676] - Quote
Rise said at the outset that he feels this change is necessary because testing on SiSi showed that RLMLs and RHMLs are "almost always the right answer for everything" or something very close to that. Putting unguided missiles (Rockets, Heavies and Torps used to be considered "unguided" before they changed skills to no longer make a distinction) into rapid launchers would be a hilarious waste of ammunition at worst and hilariously OP at best - nevermind the fact that you need to be literally right on top of the enemy to hit them with rockets and so would be better off using blasters anyway. |
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 20:04:00 -
[1677] - Quote
Thaddeus Eggeras wrote: The OP issues seemed to be that they have great range, their explosion radius was too small and their explosion velocity was too high.
Range can be reduced, but exp radius and velocity are good as they are. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
591
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 20:14:00 -
[1678] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Ok, now any of the smartasses defendign these changes want to come here and sy they know better than wildcat? Both math and good pvpers atest how problematic this is. So beyond reverting back to the original RLMLs (I think RHMLs will be fine), what's the solution? Because I think if anyone is holding out hope that CCP is going to reinstate the original RLML specs they're going to be extremely disappointed. Would a 20-second reload time make them too OP, or would a combination of a 30-second reload time and increased ammunition be better? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Thaddeus Eggeras
TwoTenX LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
82
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 20:21:00 -
[1679] - Quote
First you wouldn't need to be right on top of the target, you'd still be able to hit 15km to 20km with the rapid rockets and 20km to 30km with the assault rapids. And if you added to the RoF by a couple to a few seconds it would take any OP it would have away. Those get more explosion radius, which would make them less OP, and less explosion velocity which again less OP. Also not added the bonuses to explosion from cruisers, BCs, and BSs would take away making them OP. the rockets and assault T2 also wouldn't make them OP, as their damage T2 takes range away, and their range take damage way.This is a easy way to make rapids not OP and not give them a 40sec reload time which is a terrible idea. It also makes them not so useful against ships of the same size or larger, and will be only really good against smaller ships. One issue was people who used guns didn't think it was fair that rapids had great range and works good against ships the same size and smaller both. This would fix that issue in everyway. And I think deserved at least to be tested on sisi. And that the 4-sec idea should be put on hold and this in some way be tested. I'm just trying to find away besides 40sec realod to fix them, so please help. |
Niena Nuamzzar
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2013.11.17 20:25:00 -
[1680] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Would a 20-second reload time make them too OP, or would a combination of a 30-second reload time and increased ammunition be better? PvP reasons aside, PvE needs old rapid launchers back. Nerf damage by 5%, nerf range by idk 20% but bring it back as it was. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 138 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |