You know what, just ban me. screw this game.

Can I have your RLMLs?

And about light missiles being op, my light missle launcher frigates and destroyers all disagree with that and some of them aren't even Caldari.

If they're not even Caldari, they're not really true missile ships.

So, to sum it up :
- people finaly agreed that light missiles are OP ;
- people really don't like 40s reload ;
- people really don't like Rise for having such ideas ;
- people would like to see HAM OP.

On the last point, I already *showed*, with numbers, that HAM are fine. AB and skirmish links reduce missiles damage, that's a feature : missiles are affected by speed and signature, and that's the only way to reduce their damage. When AB and links don't affect missiles damage anymore, missiles are OP.

For light missiles, I think they have too much damage (like 10%) and too much range (like 20%). Why (why is always what matter in a balancing thread) ? Because considering their dps, range and damage application, that's just too much. Even cruisers will have trouble doing more dps than a LML frigate past some distances (a Hookbill or Kestrel can shoot LM at 90km for 100dps).

And for RLML, can anyone says how you balance such a module versus HML/precision + rigor/flare + TP ? Either one or the other is useless. That is considering HML need a little love.

lol?

LMLs in a Kestrel have too much range so we should nerf RLML in a Cerberus?

You make as much sense as CCP RIse.

The reason it was introduced in zee first place was because the Band of Develop- erm BoB said all missiles are unbeatable and must be nerfed hard.

You don't believe me?

Read all about it in the old forums and a very very long discussion about just this topic.

Stuff

Hmmm.... so explosion radius is more important than explosion velocity, you say.
That's very interesting.

Hmmm.... so explosion radius is more important than explosion velocity, you say.
That's very interesting.

I am somewhat concerned that you don't seem to know this and yet are preaching to people that LMs are OPd. Fortunately, you are correct that they are slightly too good for their size in comparison to other missiles. But really you should know the mechanics of why, rather than the just the empirical evidence that they seem to blow **** up really really fast.

LOL wut? "Missile tracking" was introduced because people were one-shotting frigs with cruise missiles & torps. Not to mention that Kestrels could fit them (seriously). Missiles were broken as @#%! back then, and anybody but the noobiest rawr-rawr f-tard knew that they needed a fix. It wasn't "teh ebil BoB", it was sensible people who wanted them nerfed. Hell even after the first version which factored speed more heavily than sig, you could still pop a Rifter with one HML volley from a Caracal if you caught them on a turn-around (I did it repeatedly as a 2-month scrub). Further corrections were later made (Need4Speed) so that sig radius is the primary factor, which gave smaller ships a much better survival rate. But please don't let silly things like facts mess up your conspiracy theories and misconceptions of the the "golden years of EvE".

Yep, rigor, rigor and rigor (in that order).

In 8 hours this is all moot anyway...

It was moot the moment CCP made the announcement.


Out of bread? Let them eat cake.

Sorry if this has already been discussed but as a potential feature/workaround to the long reload vs switching damage types why don't we just have a variable reload time?

You could give the new rapid launchers the same 'base' reload time as other launchers (10 seconds) and then just have an additional reload time on a per missile basis eg;

reload time = 10 + ((30 / magazine size) * used ammo))

RLML reloading with a full magazine takes 10 seconds to reload (10 + ((30 / 18) * 0)
RLML reloading with an empty magazine tokes 40 seconds to reload (10 + ((30 / 18) * 18)

RLML reloading with 10 charges in the magazine takes 23.33 seconds (10 + ((30 / 18) * 8)

This would give pilots the flexibility to change ammo mid fight without too much heartache while also allowing skilled pilots to perform 'tactical' reloads during breaks in the fighting, lending these modules to more maneuverable fights. Conversely tactics could be used against RLML users to make them waste missiles making changing ammo more painful.

Nice
You make a better game designer than Rise.

Shame you didn't post this before he went into full on lalalala I'm not listening mode.

Rapid Light Missile Launcher rate of fire set to:
Rapid Light Missile Launcher I ------------------------- 7.8s
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II ------------------------- 6.24s
Prototype 'Arbalest' Rapid Light Missile Launcher --- 6.24s
Other meta types not shown

Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher rate of fire set to:
Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher I ------------------------ 6.48s
Rapid Heavy Missile launcher II ------------------------- 5.185s
'Arbalest' Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher I ------------ 5.185s
Other meta types not shown

Reload time for both groups set to 40 seconds.

T2 Rapid Light Launchers can carry roughly 18 charges
T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers can carry roughly 23 charges

If you make sure you've done your homework before you go out hunting and have loaded up missiles with the right damage type, this is perfect!
Some fights don't even last 18-23 seconds, so why worry about having to reload? This is hit-and-run at it's best. I love it!

lol?

LMLs in a Kestrel have too much range so we should nerf RLML in a Cerberus?

You make as much sense as CCP RIse.