|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
   |
Posted - 2014.01.09 16:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Wild idea fresh of my head
instead of playing with that great idea of huge rate of fire with super long reload why not just give rapids a penalty to application stats ( maybe 10%) while reverting them to pre rubi status - biggest grudge with rapid lights we had that they were to good vs all targets ( nearly perfect application vs all targets ) - this would fix the pesky rapid lights but the problem would remain with the oh god awfull application on heavys ( time to buff those finaly ) |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 10:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:I took the day to consider the feedback and suggestions, and I think I've come up with a solid proposal for RLMLs. It's something that should address the majority of concerns and could be implemented very easily for Rubicon 1.1. While there were a lot of great ideas, I opted for KISS (keep-it-simple-stupid) RLML ProposalThe above chart shows the RLMLs from Odyssey, Rubicon and the proposed fix. I've included overheated values just for comparison even though there were no changes to heat mechanics. In short, we put RLMLs back to the Odyssey stats, retain the increased grid and CPU fittings from Rubicon and slash the ammunition to 28 for T2 launchers (everything else adjusted accordingly). This allows gameplay to essentially return to normal for RLMLs, with the caveat that players will be reloading approximately 3 times as often. And it solves the ammunition swap dilemma. This works out to an approximate 7% damage nerf for RLMLs, but does not affect light missiles or light missile launchers for frigates and destroyers - something I felt was important. The same premise should be applied to RHMLs as well (return them to the 1st pre-Rubicon iteration, slash the ammunition capacity and reduce the reload time to 10-seconds). GǪ.. HAMLs and HMLs still need to have their damage application addressed, and this proposal is not intended to (nor can it) address any of those shortcomings. Comments and feedback welcome, thanks.
thats the best proposal so far and it doesnt seem to have any weakspots - now only how do we get RISE to reconsider this ? |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 18:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
a cool comaprison on the hulls but its somehow creating a false belief that HML/ HAMs are "good"
could you post the base stats of the tengu HML/HAMs as the base value for comparison especialy when you are using % values
|
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 05:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
so missle application mods where would we place those:
lows - would need to saccrifice BCUs so we would need to go with some damage rigs and sacrifice 1-2 tank rigs - seems a bad idea
mids - so this one looks easy just kick the tps and replace but wait shield tanked ships tend to have 0-2 tps at best rest is tank and webs / points - hmm so we get into 2 problems we make tps obsolete and we get into no space to fit those - seems its time to remake TPs
high - missle ships usualy have 1 spare high slot so maybe those could go in here but that application mod would need to have so absurd stats since it would need to make a difference on the stats with just 1 mod |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 07:18:00 -
[5] - Quote
I am disposable wrote:Vinyl 41 wrote:so missle application mods where would we place those:
lows - would need to saccrifice BCUs so we would need to go with some damage rigs and sacrifice 1-2 tank rigs - seems a bad idea Swapping out the third BCU that is so common on shield tanking missile boats would yield much better results in most cases. Armor tanking missile boats might have trouble fitting them but they have more flexibility in mid slots for TPs and/or webs. I think it's obvious that low slots are where such modules should go.
this still leaves us with what 1 aplication ench so what ******* godly % to stats must it add to make the missles work - this leaves the same problem as making it a high slot mod - you would need 2 of those to make them balanced and thats kinda gimping your damage or fit
best would be to make a remake the TP mechanics to the proposed missle aplication enchanters |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 11:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
so how to change TP mechanics well how about we add a bonus to missle application but only for the ship thats causing the effect leaving the global signature radius there ( maybe a 15% radius and 10% velocity - numbers just out of head ofc those would be stacking penalized ) or maybe smt similar could get incorporated into a new skill that when atacking a painted target your missles get 2% ( once again a random number ) per lvl increased aplication stats
|
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 17:04:00 -
[7] - Quote
im not that biased towards any weapon system for me missles should be a below avarage dps system that should reliable apply its damage over the whole range - kinda like a DoT effect |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 17:58:00 -
[8] - Quote
problem is that TP in its current form is considered medicore at best - im sick of the jokes that you need 10 TPs and 10 webs to make most missles work
most pvp ships have at best 3 bcus so giving away 2 of those will gimp the dps very hard forcing you to invest into rigs - thats a tricky situation - ofc CCP could up the base damage on some missles here but thats not gonna happen |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.15 19:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
still guys TPs offer the most benefits to missles mostly sure they give benefits to all but missles get the most of this becaue on how the missles formulas work and the huge range on TPs is idealy suited to support long range missle platforms if you want to use short range missles your allways better with an "op" web
but to clarify things here ive done 2 proposals 1 to change TPs mechanics and there was a second one to add a new skill that would increase missle aplication on TP targets by 2-3% per lvl ( we could call it advanced missle guidance ) this way we would get the same benefits as on the proposed new module without any serious drawbacks |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 08:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
yes yes we know that webs are like a swiss army knife - just to good to replace them
and pls can we stop poiting out that HML are bad - we allready know that very good
not gonna coment on that caracal idea - persolnaly dont like it but it could work in a 3-4 people group with a dedicated tanked tackler
and and im eagerly waiting for the "a wild RISE apeared, hes gonna post" moment with a bunch of news on the rapids fix  |
|
|
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 15:32:00 -
[11] - Quote
so were getting a TP nerf now how will that change to our evil plan of creating the op missles system ? |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
19
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 17:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
seems CCP is doing whatever possible to increase the importance of webs on every possible ship type by nerfing eerything else - no love for kite warfare |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
20
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 18:34:00 -
[13] - Quote
nothing rly changes to my beloved cruise golem besides that not the 3rd painter now has some uses
but sudenly my 2 tp hml cerb got somehow worse - thats a strange feeling when you know its allready bad and the second moment it gets even worse |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
21
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:02:00 -
[14] - Quote
dont hype about that 20% since the real difference from current values will be whooping 8% more so even if your using hams there wont be that big of a difference in the aplication besides that if you insist on using it to long you will lose the benefit totaly
that will translate to a more or less marginal damage increase for a short time - and all that available only to the pvp guys since who will use OH on TPs in pve rly |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 09:58:00 -
[15] - Quote
currently the most expensive meta 4 laucher is the light missle one the pretty high price on meta 4 heavy shouldn't be such a supprise to you since with the removal of rapid lights from pve were stuck with heavys as the go to weapon for l3 and early l4 for the new pilots |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 12:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
Katabrok First wrote:This is the undying thread!!!
yup miner bumping mk II
but now back to serious stuff - great news no TP nerf in rubi 1.1 |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:49:00 -
[17] - Quote
i was allways asking meself too why couldnt rapid heavys benefit from 50% missle velocity hull bonus i remember those profiting form the rate of fire one but not the velocity - but yeah i think there are more urgent problems those launchers have right now |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 18:01:00 -
[18] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Captain Hoax wrote:If it were up to me, I would increase rapid launcher capacity by 50%GǪ And that's a good place to stopGǪ Rate of fire is ideal at the moment for both launchers. They're just lacking with ammunition capacity, so the exact number is a 1.5555% increase (28 for T2 RLML, 36 for T2 RHML).
and here we get a problem if we consider that heavys might get buffed in some time keeping that absurd rate of fire will require tweaking or even once again remaking those launchers to not create a burst dps monster system |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 18:02:00 -
[19] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Vinyl 41 wrote:i was allways asking meself too why couldnt rapid heavys benefit from 50% missle velocity hull bonus i remember those profiting form the rate of fire one but not the velocity - but yeah i think there are more urgent problems those launchers have right now I'd love the +50% missile velocity bonus on my Raven for RHMLs...
so were allready 2 i would even exchange that rate of fire bonus to the velocity one - RHML raven  |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 18:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
yup yup 1k+ paper dps now lets buff the heavys stats and we get a problem |
|
|
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 20:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
well they remain the same as on rubi 1.0 but you still can get that 20% bonus from OH - i thinkt thats a pretty good starting point to the future changes that should get paired with the webs nerf/change/rework |
Vinyl 41
Perkone Academy
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 13:34:00 -
[22] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:As we all anxiously await an updateGǪ
yup its about time to hear smt  |
|
|
| |
|