Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea

Would love if you expanded a bit.

will role bonus on golem affect RHML ?

why would you choose to use a weapon system with 40second downtime (think about this in a 10% tidi 4 hour fight) when you could use a weapon system that does half the applied dps (Cruise missiles, or any gun ever) and you don't spend half the time playing with your largly flaccid gentry while you watch your reload timer.


Then the FC will call for the fleet to load Mjolnir instead.

Then the FC will call for the fleet to load Mjolnir instead.

I don't think

Would love if you expanded a bit.

Hi!

As you guys know, we're introducing Rapid Heavy Missile Launchers in Rubicon for battleships that will echo the Rapid Light Launchers in design. Well, now that the current design has been out and available for discussion for awhile, we've taken on a lot of feedback and we don't feel completely satisfied with them.

The problem we're facing is that it's very hard to create a good balance between rapid launchers and their on-size counterparts(torpedo launchers, cruise launchers, heavy missile launchers and heavy assault missile launchers). Currently I feel we have the numbers high enough that they are almost always the right choice, but if we tune them down at all they will almost never be the right choice. We would much rather that the decision to use rapid launchers depended heavily on context and that you would choose them not because they were generally better than their competition but because your specific situation called for them.

Here's the plan to improve the situation:

Rapid Launchers (both Light and Heavy) will be changed to have a much higher damage per second number, roughly on par with Heavy Assault Launchers and Torpedo Launchers respectively, but their ammo capacity will be reduced and their reload time will be increased increased (think Ancilliary Shield Boosters). Some specifics:

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

This translates to a Raven with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Heavy Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 926 dps
This translates to a Caracal with 3x BCU, T2 Rapid Light Launchers and Scourge Fury missiles doing 409 dps

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.

This would provide new strategic gameplay for Rapid Missile users as well as their opponents. It would make these systems stronger against ships that can be killed inside the active window(smaller ships) but worse over longer fights, which would usually mean fights against ships in the same class or larger. It would generally be more interesting but would also leave more space for the main missile systems to thrive as well.

Let me know what you think and keep in mind that numbers may be adjusted slightly as we continue to test.
Thanks

CCP Rise
Bringing Solo Back

A weapon system that I can only use for 2 minutes (like the new RLML's) before a 40 second reload is useless at that point I'm better of sacrificing a rig slot for a T2 rigor and carrying a crash pill on a HAM ship. To many small cruiser engagements last more then 2 minutes and there's other options for clearing tackle. Also with the prevalence of T1 logi in the current meta I'm unlike to kill anything but maybe a tackler in that time window.

those changes HURT solo. Solo ships that used rapid laucnhers now cannto kill anything of their size before reloading.

Rapid Launchers (both Light and Heavy) will be changed to have a much higher damage per second number, roughly on par with Heavy Assault Launchers and Torpedo Launchers respectively, but their ammo capacity will be reduced and their reload time will be increased increased (think Ancilliary Shield Boosters).

those changes HURT solo. Solo ships that used rapid laucnhers now cannto kill anything of their size before reloading.

This would provide new strategic gameplay for Rapid Missile users as well as their opponents. It would make these systems stronger against ships that can be killed inside the active window(smaller ships) but worse over longer fights, which would usually mean fights against ships in the same class or larger.

you do realize higher dps while firing will break tanks easier

and dmg goes down over time gradually if 1x reload suffice you still have 292 dps over 140s in case of fozzies RLML Cara example thats about what it does now.

Oh hey I guess the part where these launchers are meant to be used to engage ships smaller than their own size just went 'whoosh'. Here, i'll quote it for you.



Seriously, these launchers would provide an essentially unique role in weapons in Eve at the moment (front loaded DPS with enhanced damage application; no other weapon system works this way currently). More interesting toys in the sandbox generally leads to more interesting things happen.

You simply destroyed my best ship (cerberus with rapid launchers). With that long reload time I cannot kill anythign meaningful (and i need rapid launchers because hamds do not fit with an useful fit). Mehh 1 billion isp spent on a ship that will be thrown in garbage can now.

Also that cahnge makes ROF bonus on launchrs a VERY SAD feature :/


Think about those numbers.. make a few more charges. So that you can kill acruiser with it.

OThewrwise you jus tmade the weapon useles for SOLO and small gang work. Surprise.. as if this was not a trend in game.

Oh hey I guess the part where these launchers are meant to be used to engage ships smaller than their own size just went 'whoosh'. Here, i'll quote it for you.



Seriously, these launchers would provide an essentially unique role in weapons in Eve at the moment (front loaded DPS with enhanced damage application; no other weapon system works this way currently). More interesting toys in the sandbox generally leads to more interesting things happen.

You mean it wil be useful when you ahve a SINGLE enemy to fire? When they have 2 t2 frigates you are ******?

great..

I know goons only fly in lbobs, but some peopel liek to fly solo or in pairs. And this changes hurt a LOT

A single 1600 plate in a cruiser will make a rapid missile user.. laughable.

flying a hauler through lowsec with a ecm mod on it to roll the dice and hopefully jam someone so they cant point you

No. ASB-like reload time is a hack, not a solution. If you can't balance them, don't introduce them.

i did not say the rlml will be as good as before just that it needs to have a closer look before everybody screams it is s****

there are clearly bad things like all valid solo ships vanishing one after another
i just tried to pint out that there might be something positive to the change.

this is a "second" first iteration maybe dmg gets tuned down a bit so that reload timer can goe to 20-30 s?
which keeps characteristics but eases the situation.
who knows we need to have testing and a critical discussion not a witch hunt.

i like the thought behind the change (while i still sad to loose the current rlml cara...)

i think it should be designed so if your charges reach 0 it takes 40 seconds to reload but to switch charge types (albeit without going back to a full reload) it would take the normal amount of time. (or no time, i dunno, that could be another bonus of using them)

Sadly no, because what good is my increased dps when I have to fight say a T2 Gallente or Caldari hull and I find myself with Kinetic missiles loaded? Normally you'd cringe a little and waste 10 seconds swapping to EM or Explosive, with proposed changes you're well boned basically.

This is a very valid point.

You simply destroyed my best ship (cerberus with rapid launchers). With that long reload time I cannot kill anythign meaningful (and i need rapid launchers because hamds do not fit with an useful fit). Mehh 1 billion isp spent on a ship that will be thrown in garbage can now.

Also that cahnge makes ROF bonus on launchrs a VERY SAD feature :/


Think about those numbers.. make a few more charges. So that you can kill acruiser with it.

OThewrwise you jus tmade the weapon useles for SOLO and small gang work. Surprise.. as if this was not a trend in game.

Let me know what you think and keep in mind that numbers may be adjusted slightly as we continue to test.
Thanks

All those crying about their precious 'solo' RLML Cerbs & Tengus aren't kidding anyone. It's like the HM drakes & tengus before, they will usually be in a small gang, built to use multiple links, and harvest t1 noob frigate killmails (and then cherry-picking the remaining defanged gang), all the while claiming ~elite smallgang pvp~ and never having to think about diminishing their own damage application via transversal.

I enjoy flying Caracals into frigate gangs and shredding them quickly. This change will significantly increase the speed at which I can do that, and provided I am not bad and get tackled, kiting around during the reload, or bailing after the charges are done won't be terrible.

For those saying this is change bad because it means RLML ships cant deal enough damage to same size ships, isn't this kind of the idea? It's a frigate sized charge.

I believe that's the crux of the matter, that all Rapid missile systems break the fundamental Eve balancing traits of fragility of plaform vs effectiveness of applying dps. Destroyers get 8 guns, but are relatively fat & slow. BCs get more turrets than cruisers, but again are less mobile and take more damage. Even tier3/A BC are fragile on paper for their potential dps.
"rapid" weapons are obviously about packing 8 or more effective, bonused smaller weapon systems onto a more durable ship. If they can't just remove rapid lights outright, then rapid heavies (and dare I say rapid cruises for capital ships) will need such a serious change to be balanced, to be a fair tradeoff consideration.

All those crying about their precious 'solo' RLML Cerbs & Tengus aren't kidding anyone. It's like the HM drakes & tengus before, they will usually be in a small gang, built to use multiple links, and harvest t1 noob frigate killmails (and then cherry-picking the remaining defanged gang), all the while claiming ~elite smallgang pvp~ and never having to think about diminishing their own damage application via transversal.
Edit: page1 replies have already nailed it, that these weapons systems aren't for a fleet's main dps, they're support. Compose your fleets at least, you crybabies.

The reload timer mechanic itself cleary isn't a problem for acceptance, people lapped up the ASB and its timer when it was OP, and now it still has tradeoffs that are very reasonable. Likewise I'm sure people will work out to do 2 or more sets of rapid launchers and manage them should these changes happen.

I thus quite like the idea of the burst & reload dps, letting these 'support' fits do that just as effectively as ever(if not far more so), but then facing a real tradeoff when tankier BCs, BSs, or 1 or 2 smart logi can simply deaggro from them if on a gate/station/POS, or force them off through greater sustained combat effectiveness. If you wanted to burn through cruiser, BCs and larger targets, you should have to bring medium & large weapon systems to get the job done with comparable numbers.

The only real point I still want to raise is light missiles in general, and on the Talwar specifically. They're everywhere, minimal-cost-meta fitted, and have a disgusting range & volley for their isk & SP cost. I like new players having something they get basic fleet experience in, but this mindless anchoring & missile spam just reeks of drakes of old. Maybe their fitting, or light missile's range/volley needs a look at? They are a frigate-scale weapon after all.

I think that this is a deeply misguided approach to solving what is basically a non-problem. You claim that RLMLs are "almost always the right choice", which I think is a pretty ridiculous assertion. There are two good cruiser-sized missile options at the moment, RLMs and HAMs. They both have their strengths and weaknesses, and they both see a lot of use in pvp. HMLs aren't much good, but that's nothing to do with the strength of RLMs, it's because HMLs are colossal turdpiles that are outperformed by just about every alternative, including the various long-range medium turrets, the other medium missile types, scorch M, and typing bad words in local. Breaking all of the current RLML use cases won't magically make HMLs more attractive, it'll just consign a currently useful weapon system to the scrapheap.

By the way, Rise, I saw that little trick you did there using Fury-type T2 kinetic missiles on kinetic-bonused hulls to artificially inflate the DPS numbers. How about some numbers with T1 thermal missiles?

Would love if you expanded a bit.

You're not nearly as clever as you think you are.

People who are actually good at this game wouldn't shoot T1 thermal missiles from T2 launchers on a kinetic bonused hull. Hope this helps.

No desire to be clever. I actually thought it was pretty obvious, but nobody had mentioned it yet so I decided I would.

No desire to be clever. I actually thought it was pretty obvious, but nobody had mentioned it yet so I decided I would.

People who are actually good at this game wouldn't shoot T1 thermal missiles from T2 launchers on a kinetic bonused hull. Hope this helps.

Summary: Burst DPS increases by 53.8%, prolonged DPS decreases by about 9.9%.

And now the Goon CSMS are coming on an insulting people instead of addressing the issue.

Yayness. Thread officially now made of win.

This made me scared for a second and then I realized you used the RHML charge amount instead of the RLML. So instead of 23 charges it should be 18 which will lower the DPS a bit more.

This is a terrible idea.

1) Having a lot of downtime is just bad gameplay design. In a gang, you might stay on the field to provide point and webs, but if you are solo, you basically are going to kill 1-2 targets and warp out. And then nobody gets to do anything for the next 40s while you reload. It promotes non-interactive gameplay.

2) Its not intuitive. Its yet another thing that vets know that noobs dont.

3) Its not that people use rapid lights because they are really good. We use them because the other medium missile systems are utter trash. I would love to be able to use heavy missiles again, but there is just no reason since they are currently the worst weapon system in the entire game for anything but giant blobs.

4) There is no alternative. You can use normal shield boosters instead of ancillary boosters. You can use normal armor reps instead of ancillary reps. There are good reasons to choose each. For medium missile launchers, there isnt any alternative to rapid lights. Heavy missiles are too slow, do too little damage for the fitting, and apply too poorly. Heavy assaults are too short range, and apply even more poorly.

5) While roaming, its can be very difficult to make a 40s reload when going gate to gate. This will just slow gangs down, with no real reason to do so.

Making this change will basically just end the use of missile ships in small gangs. People will just go to other ships, instead of dealing with the possibility of being tackled and having to wait for close to a minute to return fire.

If you want people to choose heavy missiles, then make heavy missiles be something besides a trash tier weapons system.

Links make HAMs ****. It's true. HAMs have a very high DRF so any ship that has a speed of 160% of its signature radius or higher takes reduced damage from CN HAMs on an almost 1:1 basis. When links simultaneously provide a speed increase and a sig radius reduction, any missiles bigger than RLMs become garbage. Links mean RLMs are vastly superior to all other missiles on basically all other non-webbed targets. (even some battleships) RLMs also outdamage HAMs on most cruisers with a single web applied and will actually outdamage HAMs on the really low-sig cruisers (scythe fleet) even if they have two webs applied.

A linked ABing Machariel takes half damage from CN HAMs. A freaking battleship, but links mean you're doing half damage with a cruiser-sized weapon. That's with no mass/agility mods, no snakes or speed implants, and no overheating. Overheating the AB on the Mach drops HAM DPS down to 38.16%.

This is a terrible idea.

1) Having a lot of downtime is just bad gameplay design. In a gang, you might stay on the field to provide point and webs, but if you are solo, you basically are going to kill 1-2 targets and warp out. And then nobody gets to do anything for the next 40s while you reload. It promotes non-interactive gameplay.

2) Its not intuitive. Its yet another thing that vets know that noobs dont.

3) Its not that people use rapid lights because they are really good. We use them because the other medium missile systems are utter trash. I would love to be able to use heavy missiles again, but there is just no reason since they are currently the worst weapon system in the entire game for anything but giant blobs.

4) There is no alternative. You can use normal shield boosters instead of ancillary boosters. You can use normal armor reps instead of ancillary reps. There are good reasons to choose each. For medium missile launchers, there isnt any alternative to rapid lights. Heavy missiles are too slow, do too little damage for the fitting, and apply too poorly. Heavy assaults are too short range, and apply even more poorly.

5) While roaming, its can be very difficult to make a 40s reload when going gate to gate. This will just slow gangs down, with no real reason to do so.

Making this change will basically just end the use of missile ships in small gangs. People will just go to other ships, instead of dealing with the possibility of being tackled and having to wait for close to a minute to return fire.

If you want people to choose heavy missiles, then make heavy missiles be something besides a trash tier weapons system.

1) Having a lot of downtime is just bad gameplay design. In a gang, you might stay on the field to provide point and webs, but if you are solo, you basically are going to kill 1-2 targets and warp out. And then nobody gets to do anything for the next 40s while you reload. It promotes non-interactive gameplay.

2) Its not intuitive. Its yet another thing that vets know that noobs dont.

3) Its not that people use rapid lights because they are really good. We use them because the other medium missile systems are utter trash. I would love to be able to use heavy missiles again, but there is just no reason since they are currently the worst weapon system in the entire game for anything but giant blobs.

4) There is no alternative. You can use normal shield boosters instead of ancillary boosters. You can use normal armor reps instead of ancillary reps. There are good reasons to choose each. For medium missile launchers, there isnt any alternative to rapid lights. Heavy missiles are too slow, do too little damage for the fitting, and apply too poorly. Heavy assaults are too short range, and apply even more poorly.

5) While roaming, its can be very difficult to make a 40s reload when going gate to gate. This will just slow gangs down, with no real reason to do so.

Making this change will basically just end the use of missile ships in small gangs. People will just go to other ships, instead of dealing with the possibility of being tackled and having to wait for close to a minute to return fire.

If you want people to choose heavy missiles, then make heavy missiles be something besides a trash tier weapons system.

The idea that missiles won't get used in small scale pvp because of this change is bizarre considering people use missiles of all three types quite a lot already and this change has no effect on the other two types.

For a start, this is more of a "links are stupid OP" issue than a problem with HAMs per se. More to the point, however, HAMs are close range weapons so anything you're shooting with them should be hard tackled already. In more realistic situations, their damage application is absolutely fine for the kinds of fights that you'd want to use them in. You wouldn't fit RLMs on a sacrilege or a brawling missile legion, even if their bonuses applied to light missiles because in the situations where those ships excel, the drawbacks of HAMs are easily mitigated and their strengths in terms of raw DPS become much more valuable than the superior application of RLMs.

1) Actual downtime is bad. Having to make decisions about how to manage timers is central to EVE and quite a few other games as well.

2) Having modules in a category not all work the same is pretty standard, and this isn't nearly as punishing of a mechanic before you understand it as several others.

3) People do use rapid lights because they're really good, they also use heavy missiles a lot despite your opinion that they are utter trash.

4) Just because you don't want to use HML or HAMs doesn't mean they don't exist. I don't like using normal shield boosters but that doesn't mean I can say there's no alternative to ASBs.

5) Gangs can decide if they are willing to wait an extra 5-10 seconds sometimes on some gates. I think module repair is a much more likely culprit in this example.

The idea that missiles won't get used in small scale pvp because of this change is bizarre considering people use missiles of all three types quite a lot already and this change has no effect on the other two types.

5) Gangs can decide if they are willing to wait an extra 5-10 seconds sometimes on some gates. I think module repair is a much more likely culprit in this example.

RLMs outperform HAMs on pretty much all cruisers, even if webbed.

Isn't this argument rather inconsistent with the one you make in the OP where you say that "[rapid launchers] are almost always the right choice"?

You can't simultaneously believe both to be true. If RLMs are already well-balanced against the alternative medium-sized missile launchers then there's no need for this change whatsoever, and if they're not then you can't just dismiss the statement that HMLs are trash by citing usage figures.

(most eve players take a looooooong time to react to shifts in the meta and will continue using ships and weapons that have become sub-par due to recent balance changes out of habit, so pointing to ~metrics~ about the relative usage of different ships/weapon systems doesn't necessarily tell you much of anything about their actual state of balance)

1) Actual downtime is bad. Having to make decisions about how to manage timers is central to EVE and quite a few other games as well.

2) Having modules in a category not all work the same is pretty standard, and this isn't nearly as punishing of a mechanic before you understand it as several others.

3) People do use rapid lights because they're really good, they also use heavy missiles a lot despite your opinion that they are utter trash.

4) Just because you don't want to use HML or HAMs doesn't mean they don't exist. I don't like using normal shield boosters but that doesn't mean I can say there's no alternative to ASBs.

5) Gangs can decide if they are willing to wait an extra 5-10 seconds sometimes on some gates. I think module repair is a much more likely culprit in this example.

The idea that missiles won't get used in small scale pvp because of this change is bizarre considering people use missiles of all three types quite a lot already and this change has no effect on the other two types.

RLMs outperform HAMs on pretty much all cruisers, even if webbed.

HAMs would have OK application if it wasn't for links, but the fact that applying links alone reduces HAM damage by 50% while doing nothing to RLM damage just kills them. I'm pretty sure it's correct to fit RLMs to the Sac despite losing the bonus, you'll still do more damage. Tengu is best with RLMs despite losing a bonus too.

You're right it sounds like I'm taking both sides a bit. I think RLMs are not well balance, but as you say, people adjust slowly so the usage doesn't represent balance completely accurately. I'm trying to say that while RLM are out of balance and making HML a bad choice usually, they aren't so bad that no one would use them if RLM changed. Even though I think they are definitely behind, I don't think it's by as much as Michael does and the ~metrics~ were meant to support that.

Holy crap that's terrible ******* idea

Ok:

Take the swarm ammo idea I have further up in this thread, and instead of loading the swarm ammo into RLMs, you load it into HMLs.

HMLs can now dual mode as either long range, low dps ships, but can reload to short range high burst damage, high application ammo. Increase the reload time to 60s.

HMLs now have role "1/2 dps ships until tackle shows up, then swap to anti tackle". This is different from the RLM role of being hilariously low dps against larger targets. Gangs could then either use RLM ships for anti tackle, or HML ships for slightly less anti tackle, but higher dps when shooting primaries. You get choices in gang composition, which is good. For rapid heavy launchers, im not really sure what to do, since cruises hit frigates just as well as heavy missiles (which is to say, very badly)

Ok here's my take, this sounds like a good change.

For tweaking, i'd say lowering continuous dps by letsay 10-15% of rlml's would a good sweet spot. By continuous i mean if i have 2 x 3 rlml groups and i empty one launcher and start shooting with the other one when the reload time for first one will be done when second one starts reloading. For when using both a 50-60% increase in dps would be what i'd say is somethign i'd be willing to easily have for loss of some continuous dps. (these numbers are to be reflected on current rlml on tranquil and current proposal of rhml for rubicon)

Why? This gives me the perfect way of having extra dps for when i need it, for when i need less, i use less.

Hams, hams need abit more application ability, not much, enough to make them that small bit more effective against cruisers when using a painter (i see painter as being the webber blasters love for damage application). I'd also like to see some of hams max flight time moved to it's velocity, 25% or so. All this applies to torpedoes aswell, though i'd see torpedoes needing slightly more range also.

Hmls, well i'm not sure what to do with them, more application maybe, though currently, i see no reason for it, they're great for fleets and in fleets you can easily use painters and webbers to maximize damage output, just like you can with cruise missiles.

Anyways thats my opinion, and for the whiners, losing abit of overall dps for the ability to produce bigger burst (especially in solo and small gang situations where you really need to break that navy omens 200dps tank), long reload time doesn't mean you have to shoot all missiles from all tubes at the same time, use your brain and start making better arguments.

Ok here's my take, this sounds like a good change.

For tweaking, i'd say lowering continuous dps by letsay 10-15% of rlml's would a good sweet spot. By continuous i mean if i have 2 x 3 rlml groups and i empty one launcher and start shooting with the other one when the reload time for first one will be done when second one starts reloading. For when using both a 50-60% increase in dps would be what i'd say is somethign i'd be willing to easily have for loss of some continuous dps. (these numbers are to be reflected on current rlml on tranquil and current proposal of rhml for rubicon)

Why? This gives me the perfect way of having extra dps for when i need it, for when i need less, i use less.

Hams, hams need abit more application ability, not much, enough to make them that small bit more effective against cruisers when using a painter (i see painter as being the webber blasters love for damage application). I'd also like to see some of hams max flight time moved to it's velocity, 25% or so. All this applies to torpedoes aswell, though i'd see torpedoes needing slightly more range also.

Hmls, well i'm not sure what to do with them, more application maybe, though currently, i see no reason for it, they're great for fleets and in fleets you can easily use painters and webbers to maximize damage output, just like you can with cruise missiles.

Anyways thats my opinion, and for the whiners, losing abit of overall dps for the ability to produce bigger burst (especially in solo and small gang situations where you really need to break that navy omens 200dps tank), long reload time doesn't mean you have to shoot all missiles from all tubes at the same time, use your brain and start making better arguments.

I have a different idea.


How about instead of calling them rapids cause they fire off a bunch of missiles quickly,
instead,

Completely remove reloading from rapid launchers.


adjust their RoF and whatever else so that they're balanced.

But instead of worrying about reloading, the advantage that these launchers would have is that they never reload, unless you're swapping damage types.

Wow, we're gonna have a legit MLRS - I've always loved those - a hail of destruction, rains on the head of your foes, then you pack and GTFO.
The quick unload/slow reload would force some new dynamics on the field. I imagine it like that - 4-5 of those warp in, unload all they got then disappear just as they came - would look awesome in small skirmishes.

The problem is nto on the hams, the problem is that the band of speed and signature where missiles do full damage reducing to no damage is TOO narrow

Ok here's my take, this sounds like a good change.

For tweaking, i'd say lowering continuous dps by letsay 10-15% of rlml's would a good sweet spot. By continuous i mean if i have 2 x 3 rlml groups and i empty one launcher and start shooting with the other one when the reload time for first one will be done when second one starts reloading. For when using both a 50-60% increase in dps would be what i'd say is somethign i'd be willing to easily have for loss of some continuous dps. (these numbers are to be reflected on current rlml on tranquil and current proposal of rhml for rubicon)

Why? This gives me the perfect way of having extra dps for when i need it, for when i need less, i use less.

Hams, hams need abit more application ability, not much, enough to make them that small bit more effective against cruisers when using a painter (i see painter as being the webber blasters love for damage application). I'd also like to see some of hams max flight time moved to it's velocity, 25% or so. All this applies to torpedoes aswell, though i'd see torpedoes needing slightly more range also.

Hmls, well i'm not sure what to do with them, more application maybe, though currently, i see no reason for it, they're great for fleets and in fleets you can easily use painters and webbers to maximize damage output, just like you can with cruise missiles.

Anyways thats my opinion, and for the whiners, losing abit of overall dps for the ability to produce bigger burst (especially in solo and small gang situations where you really need to break that navy omens 200dps tank), long reload time doesn't mean you have to shoot all missiles from all tubes at the same time, use your brain and start making better arguments.

Lots of people not getting the potential of front-loaded dps against smaller targets in this thread I think.

If anything should have a "burst" mechanic with a long reload time, it should be remote reps.

Explain it to me, then. I don't see how its better than the current RML.

though i think the idea is neat... perhaps there could be a skill added that reduces the reload time by 2 seconds per level. that way at lev V reload is only 30 seconds.

[

consider... softer things. things which tend to survive through use of range and/or sig tanking. interceptors, ABC's, logi cruisers, Recons... there's all kinds of targets which could be scrubbed from the field in a rather short time frame with this idea.

.

I think HMLs should be more attractive again then. Compared with other medium long range turrets - which got a boost recently - they feel quite subpar. If RLMLs get a more specific role, I'd like to use HMLs more (on a Caracal for instance). But they are just plain bad. Especially in terms of damage application.

You mean you will fire a volley that will make your enemy angry but not where close to be in danger of death... and then you will run away?

Not very efficient way of PVP

You shoud l use your brian and calcualte how much damage you can dish with ALL missiles ina cerberus for example (the ship that effectively mos tuse rapid launchers). 20 k damage.. no matter how you stagger it. You are just somethign lauguable. You will VERY rappdly brign your enemy to low armor.. then do nothing.. until he gets away or kills you.


That is NOT good!

Ever heard of the rabbit and the turtle child story? You know wich one won at the end?

can we get rapid cruise launchers? :)

With proposed changes, IMO, up to 20 seconds reload time could be acceptable but no more! Better solution, as already stated, would be making a new launcher or new missile types so we can CHOOSE! Please, please, please, don't kill the last decent weapon system for most of the Caldari ships

Rapid Launchers (both Light and Heavy) will be changed to have a much higher damage per second number, roughly on par with Heavy Assault Launchers and Torpedo Launchers respectively, but their ammo capacity will be reduced and their reload time will be increased increased (think Ancilliary Shield Boosters).

Or you could just use an actual dps ship to kill all of those except the interceptor, and do more dps, and then continue doing more dps instead of reloading for 40s.

Let's just go all the way down the slippery slope.

How about we finally delegate missiles to being support weapons? The ancillary concept is basically the RL equivalent of a one-shot anti-tank weapon carried by infantry. Meaning, ancillary missile packs just provide burst damage and are either a limited use item or have extremely long reload rates, making them something that you would put into a utility high slot (dedicated launcher slots would go away.)

Burst damage promotes hit and run tactics, guns reign supreme, load is reduced (except for that spike when everyone pops off their missile packs at once) and the Phoenix can finally be replaced with a gunship.


Think missiles from the old Renegade Legion Leviathan cap ship combat game or Rocket Launchers from Battletech.

Cruise missiles are pretty good after the rebalance last year.

True but they aren't as much used in small gangs pvp.

This just makes no sense, what is proposed atm is 409 dps for ~50seconds for a caracal (which has 5 launchers), reload time is 40 seconds, if you fire 3 launchers for 50 seconds and start firing 2 launchers on top of that at 40 second mark, you'll do 245 dps for 40 seconds, 409 dps for 10 seconds and then 163,6 dps for 40 seconds, after which you dps once again rises to 245 for the next 40 seconds. Atm you'll do 266 dps with 5 scourge furies on a caracal.

What i suggest is increasing the dps to letsay 440 at which point using them continuously becomes


264 dps for 40 seconds followed by 440 dps for 10 seconds followed by 176 dps for the last 40 seconds of the cycle.

I do not in any way understand how this becomes "you only get 20 k damage and then you're done". If i use the new rlml's in this way i lose very little dps in continuous fire (like i said earlier) and gain the possibility of bursting alot more than before if i want.

What this does is gives me the possibility of choosing, only thing i see a problem with is making sure the numbers are good enough so the continuous fire isn't too much nerfed from what it was before while being able to burst if needed.

Edit: atm a caracal can dishout 23 940 damage in 90 seconds after current proposal it can dishout 20 434 in 90 seconds. Do you get it now ?

Seriously? You couldn't find a way to tweak missile stats so that rapid launchers do ~75% of the theoretical DPS of whatever their on-size equivalent is, but with better damage application? How does something that nerfs your DPS in exchange for better performance in some specific scenario (in which you are fighting something smaller than usual) not constitute a tradeoff / niche fitting?

If you can't figure out a set of numbers that will make rapids apply more damage to undersized targets than their on-sized counterparts while applying less damage to on-size or plus-size targets... well I'm not really sure what to say. You're doing it wrong?

This idea sucks. It makes rapids utterly useless for any small gang / solo ships and is totally unnecessary. Rapids already are a niche weapon: if they're not niche enough then fiddle the dps / application numbers again until they strike an appropriate balance rather than turning another niche strategy into a useless gimmick.

I fail to see how 800dps in a cerberus for 40 seconds that applies on like any ship it shoots at is a reason to "throw it in the garbage can".

Its the same DPS as before. If your opponent can burst tank 40 seconds of 800 dps he can tank a consistent 400 dps too.

FORGET THE DPS!! How much TOTAL damage can you do before reload? It will be less than EHP of a cruiser!! That is the issue.


Even if you have 20 THOSUAND dps, but you fire for 1 second and reload for 20k seconds.. you will NEVER kill a well fit enemy cruiser.. in fact this last example is the worse situation you could have basically

Would love if you expanded a bit.

With a 40 second reload the situation that will happen is: Do lots of damage and hope you kill the target, no then they completely rep them selves while you reload your missiles then you fire off them all again and hope you kill them.

The reload time needs to go down to 20 seconds.

I'm fairly certain that the whole point of this change is that RLMLs should not be good against enemy cruisers, and should be a specialized choice for fighting smaller stuff, not the weapon-of-choice that lets you apply damage perfectly to everything all the time.

The problem we're facing is that it's very hard to create a good balance between rapid launchers and their on-size counterparts(torpedo launchers, cruise launchers, heavy missile launchers and heavy assault missile launchers). Currently I feel we have the numbers high enough that they are almost always the right choice, but if we tune them down at all they will almost never be the right choice.

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.

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.

why are you still doing lev II missions?

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.

If anything should have a "burst" mechanic with a long reload time, it should be remote reps.

Exactly. Even if it only takes a couple of volleys to kill each ship, there are a lot of ships in missions, and 18 capacity is a lot less than 30 or whatever it is now and 10 sec is a lot less than 40 sec.

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.

Lots of people not getting the potential of front-loaded dps against smaller targets in this thread I think.

This. There's a reason artillery is so popular despite having lower DPS than the other LR turrets.

I hate this idea intensely. Being a newish player (between 3 and 4 months) I was planning on using RHMLs as a transition weapon as I train for other battleship sized weapons for PVE. This pretty much ruins that idea. Now these weapons will only be a decent option for fleet pvp. That's a really bad move in my eyes.

Overall this is good discussion. Obviously there's a pretty wide range of reactions and I think that's probably a good sign. Please keep raising concerns if you have them so we spot as many potential problems as possible.

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 don't understand how 80-90% of people telling you this is a bad idea comes across as "a wide range of reactions". Very few people here like this idea.

=D



=D



=D



=D

(cough) GǪ ganking GǪ (cough) Some of us do see the potential, even with the changes as proposed.

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.


Capacity is ninety (90) with Caldari Navy RLMLs. Points to ponder:
GÇó If the 40-second reload is fine, perhaps the 75% reduction in ammunition supply is to steep (perhaps 50%)
GÇó If the new ammunition level is fine, perhaps the rate of fire increase should be 50% (instead of 35%)

It's a completely neutral change with respect to PvE. In fact if you're smart about how you do your volleying and co-ordinate with drones, etc, using time spent warping between rooms to reload and so forth, you should be able to parley this change into a useful advantage.

Eh, I'm not sure that the RMLs will be useful for ganking even after this change. It will take longer than 30s (which is the maximum CONCORD response time IIRC) to empty them, and even then, they'll still do less damage than the HAMsTorps you could fit instead.

FORGET THE DPS!! How much TOTAL damage can you do before reload? It will be less than EHP of a cruiser!! That is the issue.


Even if you have 20 THOSUAND dps, but you fire for 1 second and reload for 20k seconds.. you will NEVER kill a well fit enemy cruiser.. in fact this last example is the worse situation you could have basically

Do note that someone doing L2's will not have anything close to maximum skills Also you're talking about a 75% magazine reduction on rapid lights.

By the way if RHMLs are still not receiving range or explosion bonuses I don't see barely anyone using them on battleships ever at this point.

This. There's a reason artillery is so popular despite having lower DPS than the other LR turrets.

Will a cruiser die to the 23k dmg done by the rlml's of atm in 90 seconds ? If it won't , you have no point, have you got no brain dude? You can continuously do dps in the new model as easily as you can in the current model. When your first group of launchers are empty and start reloading you are using another group of launchers, and when group 2 is empty group 1 has already reloaded!. This means you are doing dps all the time, there is no stop in damage application. You can always shoot.

So the Cerberus becomes more and more interesting...

(cough) GǪ ganking GǪ (cough) Some of us do see the potential, even with the changes as proposed.

Very few of those people seem to understand that 2+0 has the same sum as 1+1

Nope .. they just KILLED the cerberus, that was the most powerful solo HAC.

Very few of those people seem to understand that 2+0 has the same sum as 1+1

cuss its burst dps went up 48% and its sustained dps went down 9%

totally how i see that as killed

cuss its burst dps went up 48% and its sustained dps went down 9%

totally how i see that as killed

But 1+1=3, for large values of 1.

Would love if you expanded a bit.