| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
606
   |
Posted - 2013.10.07 12:20:00 -
[1] - Quote
It would be wise to first take a look at heavy missiles. They were nerfed some time ago before the up of other medium-sized long-range weapons.
Now that these have been buffed again, I believe you CCP should first rebalance heavy missiles (I don't know for you but I never got to use them since the nerf) THEN tweak the stats of these RHML.
Edit : Also, CCP, you should first state what you want players to use in specific situations.
e.g. : For a BS versus BC, do you plan to make the BS player use Cruise or RHML ?
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
606
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 12:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:RLMLs are overpowered because light missiles are overpowered, but also just the role itself. We have these things called destroyers, which are supposed to kill frigates - it's what they do, and then the caracal comes along and does more damage at 5x the range, goes faster and has many times the tank.
Not sure why we need another class of ships that wrecks cruisers, we already have battlecruisers, and they're far more prominent than they probably should be.
Dude dont you think that you're slightly overreacting here ?
I've been in FW for a while now (this is where you're most likely to see t1 cruisers and frigates fighting eachother) and I can assure you that I've never seen nor been killed by RLMLs.
Remember that if you're at "5x times the range" you can still warp out. Also remember that since the ammo is the same and the range bonuses between frigs and cruisers are the same, a caracal won't hit from a longer distance than a frigate, if both are using light missiles.
About RHML, I believe that on a non target-painted BC they should do slightly less damage than a cruise would on a target-painted BC. On a cruiser they should probably outdamage cruise missiles regardless of if it's painted or not (= one paint, I'm not talking about crazy situations like 3 paints + motionless cruiser).
Versus other BS however, they should do less damages than cruise missiles even without paint. Seems obvious but I'm not entierly sure it would be the case if the BS is going fast. However perhaps cruise missiles should be buffed here, not the opposite.
Of course, since the only stat we can balance here is rate of fire, it only leaves limited options.
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
607
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 13:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
ApolloF117 HUN wrote:make this launchers fittable for the naga
Hey actually that would be a cool way to leave the option open to return to its original design.
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
609
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 13:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:CCP Rise wrote:... Adds continuity with medium sized missile systems...
That the same kind of continuity CCP has avoided like the plague when it comes to pulse lasers? Give me/us/them Medium and Large Gatling lasers!  Altrue wrote:..Dude dont you think that you're slightly overreacting here?... RLML wielded by a Caracal gives you a ~68 km range, range at which destroyers most commonly get to engage is around 10-15km .. seems like the x5 range is spot on. While that excessive range does allow you to warp out, keep in mind that the frigate/destroyer that is on the receiving end has to close to well within point range to apply any damage so that argument is null and void in most situations. When a ship with RLML is on the field it is basically a no-fly zone for anything small and even some cruisers (nano, light buffer). Everyone laughed at the FW Caldari die-hards when they starting running around in Caracals all those years ago, right up until the penny dropped and people realised that there is nothing one can do against them other than run away or ship up .. high-dps/high-tank AB frigates are you best bet and even then you are lucky to do any armour damage on him. In short: RLML Cruisers are better destroyers than destroyers and the dps hit is marginal against other cruisers due to what amounts to 100% applied damage using lights. There is no reason whatsoever to think that things will be any different with regards to a RHML. A one-stop weapon choice that outperforms all other options in the majority of scenarios.
... yet there are only so many cruisers seen with RLML.
Also : You're comparing a ship using a short range weapon to a ship using long range weapons. In every situation the short range will have to close the distance while the other is applying DPS. That's you're point which is invalid :D
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
618
|
Posted - 2013.10.08 05:17:00 -
[5] - Quote
As I said in the comment section, nice article !
It enlighten the role of these missiles and how they are a viable solution to pvp for missile battleships.
It is true that given the situation and the absence of range bonuses, these "long-distance" missiles are not overlapping cruise missiles domain, while at the same time, torpedoes cannot really be compared to them since they are reserved for truly massive targets.
From what I see, the missile system for battleships won't work the same way than the turret system does, since for instance a torpedo will never reach the dps of, say, a blaster, on a "regular pvp target". Yet this is balanced since there is an alternative that fits nicely at disruptor range.
Each missile type keeps its domain, and now that an interceptor can move from out of D-scan range from grid in less than 10 seconds, it is needed to have a chance of killing them even when you are a missile battleship :o
So.. good job ? :D
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
637
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 18:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
RHML find their use very precisely in BS vs smaller ships. Buffing their range would make them overlap cruise missiles, which is not the goal here.
I invite every one of you to read this brilliant article concerning RHML analysis with actual stats, graphs, and analysis, before making any undocumented feedback on the subject :
http://themittani.com/features/rapid-heavy-missile-launcher-analysis
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
637
|
Posted - 2013.10.14 19:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
Demotress wrote:is any ship gonna get a bonus to these so they arent just crap?
You get the damage bonus (and RoF) not the rest.
I agree with this decision since other bonuses would make the launcher too OP. (Imagine a typhoon bonus on these...)
G££ <= Me |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
640
|
Posted - 2013.10.15 08:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:The un-bonused range of cruise missiles is 148.1km; it's 62.9km for heavy missiles. Even with the full +50% missile velocity bonus you're talking about a range of 222.15km for cruise missiles and 94.35km for heavy missiles. Then there's the additional +10% velocity bonus cruise missiles have over heavy missiles. This is before the missile velocity on most battleship hulls, which makes cruise missiles twice as fast as heavy missiles. [...] Where you see the "overlap" escapes me, because RHMLs are clearly mid-range weapons (both in terms of range and speed). The current proposal for RHMLs solely relegate them to hulls with damage or rate of fire bonuses.
I agree with you when you say that even with range bonuses, heavy missiles would still leave plenty of "range" for cruise missiles.
But you have to consider the fact that almost nobody snipes at more than 150km, and even less with cruise missiles, since at this range you cannot slow down your target, paint it, and warp scramble it. You do ridiculous damages, and people can warp to you, it's even more true now with warp speed changes.
So even if the theoretical range is 222km, in practice you won't see much use after 150km I guess, and I would more say 100.
So that's why I say it's overlapping with cruise missiles. :)
G££ <= Me |
| |
|