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) |
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
70
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:21:00 -
[211] - Quote
I got a better plan, 4 easy steps too.
1- put up buy orders for RLML and RHML at ridiculously cheap prices
2- when usage goes down people sell 'em to my ridiculously cheap buy orders
3- feed 'em to my alt with perfect reprocessing
4- Profit! |
Kane Fenris
NWP
114
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:25:00 -
[212] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Kane Fenris wrote:Arthur Aihaken wrote:Justin Einstein wrote:The problem that I can thing of is for missioning. I use Rapid lights on my Caracal now for L2 missions, but there is no way that it will be practical to do this after the change I think. I think they'll still be fine, to be honest. You'll be dealing out substantially more DPS at the outset, which should clear out a few additional targets before having to reload. this is false you need a certain ammount off missiles/ships. The #ships you kill before reload depends on clipsize not dps. the clipsize is smaller therefore youll kill less before reload. I think you missed the point in my response. You'll only need a few volleys (at most) to kill most ship types in an L2, which means with a 35% improvement to rate of fire you can more quickly dispense any ships aggro'ing you. With maximum skills, a minimum of 3 ballistic controllers and +3/+5 damage/rate-of-fire implants I think you'll be looking at under 2 seconds per volley with Caldari Navy faction RLMLs (since it's about 3-seconds for me now). Faction launchers hold a bit more ammunition (my guestimate would be about 25 rounds). That translates into roughly 50 seconds of rapid firing before reload.
i didn't miss a thing..... you said something very false.
what you meant does not matter if you dont say it. if you meant the time needed to kill em but then say so. its not my responsibility to distinguish between intentionally wrong arguments and badly made arguments. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
1782
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:32:00 -
[213] - Quote
The concept is really cool, but the practical usage of it will be extremely limited with a 40s reload timer. Best ship I could think of to abuse this is a colaky tengu. |
XvXTeacherVxV
S.E.N.T.I.N.E.L.
43
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:33:00 -
[214] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote: Both ships would have around 50 seconds of up time followed by 40 seconds of reload meaning that over extended engagements their true dps would be a bit more than half of the dps number above.
Less up time, less reload time would be better. Cut both by 50-75%. Then you'd have small clips that you could burn through in less than 20 seconds and you'd avoid the no fun zone that is long reload times since it'd be about 10-15 seconds.
Advantages - Reload time is still long enough to be a disadvantage but not so long it's unbearable. - You could even take the opportunity to switch damage types which adds more room for good players to maximize their damage. - Overall DPS would be about the same and the frontloaded DPS wouldn't be so extreme.
Win/Win/WIn. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
3258
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:35:00 -
[215] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:, reload during jam cycles,.
Which kills your FoF option for Rapid missile boats. I predict more Falcon.
|
KatanTharkay
V I R I I Ineluctable.
14
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:36:00 -
[216] - Quote
This is a very good change. That burst DPS will greatly help solo and small gang action where you need to kill your target fast before help arriving. Yarrrr! |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
466
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:37:00 -
[217] - Quote
Kane Fenris wrote:i didn't miss a thing..... you said something very false. what you meant does not matter if you dont say it. if you meant the time needed to kill em but then say so. its not my responsibility to distinguish between intentionally wrong arguments and badly made arguments. I thought it was fairly obvious since my response was to a question about L2 missions. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
466
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:40:00 -
[218] - Quote
I think the only change that needs to be seriously considered with the current iteration is a reduction in the reload time to 20 seconds. |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
165
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:42:00 -
[219] - Quote
Undecided on the weapon change, it's not a class of weapon I'd likely use much - more of a turret person. I like the idea in principle however. However one thing I think needs to happen if you have a 40 second reload.
The ability to cancel it, or pre select the ammo to load on the next reload. Sitting and waiting 40 seconds for it to reload the ammo you don't want is just gonna be massively annoying. |
Justin Cody
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
46
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:49:00 -
[220] - Quote
Mr Floydy wrote:Undecided on the weapon change, it's not a class of weapon I'd likely use much - more of a turret person. I like the idea in principle however. However one thing I think needs to happen if you have a 40 second reload.
The ability to cancel it, or pre select the ammo to load on the next reload. Sitting and waiting 40 seconds for it to reload the ammo you don't want is just gonna be massively annoying.
Its a bad idea to start this on weapons. Ohhh how about we do this to 220mm AC's! double dps...half ammo and 40 sec reload! Or Artillery! Or Blasters! Sure you'll do 1800 dps but you won't be able to sustain it enough to make a difference!
This is like taking viagra with the added side effect of it making you prematurely ejaculate. Sure its extra heavy and creamy but now you have to wait an entire day to do it again! |
|
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
466
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:55:00 -
[221] - Quote
Justin Cody wrote:but now you have to wait an entire day to do it again! It's about the quality, not the quantity. |
El 1974
Freedom For Fantasy The Unthinkables
101
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 18:59:00 -
[222] - Quote
I think you are creating a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
You recently hit heavy missiles with the nerf bat to the point where nobody is using them any more. Now you create a larger version which doesn't have very distinct damage application compared to cruise missiles. Buff HM damage application a bit and you strengthen the RHML role for hitting smaller targets.
The second issue is the fact that you seem to think that RHMLs are somehow overpowered because they will do more damage in almost any scenario. Fleets can use TPs and/or Webs when needed, making the difference to Cruise missiles very small against almost any opponent. Once you add range to the equation I feel that in many cases FCs will prefer Cruise Missiles over RHMLs. You cannot dictate range in a battleship fleet, so the ability to apply damage at range can be crucial. |
AskariRising
State Protectorate Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:06:00 -
[223] - Quote
409 dps wont be able to kill a dual MASB hawk... |
zbaaca
POD Based Lifeforms DarkSide.
59
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:07:00 -
[224] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Justin Einstein wrote:The problem that I can thing of is for missioning. I use Rapid lights on my Caracal now for L2 missions, but there is no way that it will be practical to do this after the change I think. Why? Sustained DPS will be the same. how about speed tanking ? u spend all ammo and didn't kill webber = fail. it will be unusable for pve.
problem is that no1 wants to use overnerfed HM. |
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1458
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:13:00 -
[225] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:MeBiatch wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote:So the Cerberus becomes more and more interesting... Nope .. they just KILLED the cerberus, that was the most powerful solo HAC. cuss its burst dps went up 48% and its sustained dps went down 9% totally how i see that as killed Its sustained dps is going down by 20%, not 9%. Thats in addition to being unable to swap damage types, swap between t2 and faction ammo, reload during short warps, reload during jam cycles, and being unable to supply the on-demand dps that is the entire reason to include RLM ships in a small gang.
thanks for the math update.
honestly just make it 30 second reload time then.
that should fix things |
Liam Inkuras
Chaotic Tranquility Casoff
556
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:13:00 -
[226] - Quote
I see it like becoming a musket with fleets. One line steps up and fires, then moves back to reload while the other takes their place. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
466
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:14:00 -
[227] - Quote
zbaaca wrote:problem is that no1 wants to use overnerfed HM. And yet I still see HML Drakes everywhere I go... |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
78
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:17:00 -
[228] - Quote
Very probably the worst idea ever to be presented by a dev to the player base.
40 seconds to switch damage type
No use to fleet players due to crap long term dps No use to solo players due to dying while switching to optimal ammo No use to PvE due to crap long term dps.
Take yourself to the HR department and ask to be fired please. |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
750
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:17:00 -
[229] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:zbaaca wrote:problem is that no1 wants to use overnerfed HM. And yet I still see HML Drakes everywhere I go...
Ive also seen laser ravens, 400 plate harbingers and small armor rep maelstroms. Doesnt make any of them good. |
Fergus Runkle
Truth and Reconciliation Council
36
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:18:00 -
[230] - Quote
How about instead of messing with the stats for a launcher you actually mess { FIX} with the stats for the missiles so that HML and HAM ARE the best choice weapons for hitting same size opponents and RLML come in as dedicated anti support weapons. |
|
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
466
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:21:00 -
[231] - Quote
Michael Harari wrote:Ive also seen laser ravens, 400 plate harbingers and small armor rep maelstroms. Doesnt make any of them good. In terms of mid-range/entry-level missile platforms, HML Drakes are fine. The damage application on Navy Drakes is better, although HMLs certainly could stand to see some improvement. |
Dav Varan
Spiritus Draconis Sicarius Draconis
78
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:24:00 -
[232] - Quote
Ha Ha Ha Ha
40 seconds to swich to optimal ammo
I'm never gonna fit that trash
This is gonna make me lol all night
Do dev's ever fight in missile boat ?
Whats wrong with dps half way between hml and cml and be done with it.
|
MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
1458
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:24:00 -
[233] - Quote
So to expand on the idea of Shield transporters working like an ASB i will use the tech I version of the larger variant as an example.
activation cost stays the same
but without any cap charges loaded the amount rep per cycle will go down to:
240 per cycle
capacity 112 m3
can use 400's or 800's
with cap charges in it goes up to
540 per cycle.
one min reload time. |
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
750
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:24:00 -
[234] - Quote
Just to illustrate how bad hml drakes are, im going to edit in some screenshots of a cruise raven compared to an hml drake |
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies Joint Venture Conglomerate
311
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:27:00 -
[235] - Quote
Looks like a fun mechanic - who doesn't enjoy reloading!
I suppose it will give me something to do during the long warps in my Raven.
Perhaps the marketing department can introduce a PLEX for reload promotion? |
Jeanne Hilanen
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:28:00 -
[236] - Quote
So, HML got nerfed to **** and links make HAM and HML applied dps complete crap. And it's a wonder people prefer RLML? ****'s sake, can we have a PROPER LINK NERF now, before you start introducing new gimmicky no fun gameplay ideas? |
Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
26
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:29:00 -
[237] - Quote
Do RHML-launched heavy missiles get the range bonus from Raven hulls, now that some of the "like other battleship launchers but better" concerns have been addressed by making rapid launchers significantly different?
Other than that, this sounds interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
467
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:30:00 -
[238] - Quote
Ranamar wrote:Do RHML-launched heavy missiles get the range bonus from Raven hulls, now that some of the "like other battleship launchers but better" concerns have been addressed by making rapid launchers significantly different?
Other than that, this sounds interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out. Not in the last iteration, anyway. Just damage and rate of fire bonuses (although there was some question as to whether the Golem not receiving it was an oversight). |
Huorek
Blood Stripe Resistance
1
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:31:00 -
[239] - Quote
If the sustained DPS is roughly half the burst with all launchers going, could the Cerb have a sustained DPS of 2/3s the burst after 20~ seconds if staggering the launchers on in groups of 2 every 20~ seconds? Meaning after 20~ seconds you will always have 4 launchers going that have 54% increased DPS. I'm sure my math is off, but it seems that you have the option to either burst DPS or ramp up to about the same DPS as previously.
Obviously a large change, but I see a lot of arguments about the loss of sustained DPS, when staggering the launchers could be a way around this. |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
2820
|
Posted - 2013.11.08 19:31:00 -
[240] - Quote
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Both ships would have around 50 seconds of up time followed by 40 seconds of reload meaning that over extended engagements their true dps would be a bit more than half of the dps number above.
Less up time, less reload time would be better. Cut both by 50-75%. Then you'd have small clips that you could burn through in less than 20 seconds and you'd avoid the no fun zone that is long reload times since it'd be about 10-15 seconds. Advantages - Reload time is still long enough to be a disadvantage but not so long it's unbearable. - You could even take the opportunity to switch damage types which adds more room for good players to maximize their damage. - Overall DPS would be about the same and the frontloaded DPS wouldn't be so extreme. Win/Win/WIn.
For this to be appropriately balanced, the "high dps window" needs to be long enough to bring down a typical target. Then the reload window needs to be long enough to make it un-ideal when sustained dps is important. I think your 20s attack, 10-15s reload is too short on both accounts, and the 50s attack, 40s relaod is just about ideal. |
|
|
|
|
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 |