EVE Search - Sticky:[Rubicon 1.1] Rapid Missile Update

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Rubicon 1.1] Rapid Missile Update

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. JIHADASQUAD 197	Posted - 2014.02.01 06:13:00 - [1] - Quote Once again I would like to propose to the floor that rapid launchers function much more like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70yNAwUUsc0 In that they expend an entire clip pretty much immediately. Balancing factors vs other alpha doctrines is while arty suffers tracking, missiles still suffer their normal penalties due to target speed and sig radius, factors which piloting alone can't compensate for. Also more variation between meta levels for ammo capacity and reload time, eg meta 0 launchers hold 15 missiles, reload time is 15 seconds. ROF is nearly instantaneous expulsion of whole clip through use of the "charges per activation" being modified to 5 per cycle and ROF being changed to 2s base. T2 gets 20 rounds and launches whole clip in 4 seconds, takes 20 seconds to reload. Navy and such continue the trend. This allows extreme customisation of the weapon and ships mounting them. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. JIHADASQUAD 198	Posted - 2014.02.05 02:25:00 - [2] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: I know the discussion has primarily been on the rapid light launchers, but has anyone found a niche for the rapid heavy launchers? With every configuration I attempt I still come up short when compared to cruise launchers. Try applying any meaningful damage to a cruiser with a cruise phoon. Rhml is good for smacking low orbit ships. Not so good for smacking snipers though since no range bonuses. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. Black Flag Society 228	Posted - 2014.04.21 22:23:00 - [3] - Quote Every day until I bleed - make rapid launchers work like missile launchers from mechwarrior LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. Black Flag Society 230	Posted - 2014.04.22 19:18:00 - [4] - Quote I don't see how being speed tanked by battlecruisers and the odd battleship is even remotely comparable to railguns in deep falloff. When planning for an assault ship what points do we consider? Don't you too find mono damage types to be a bit narrow and penalising - especially on caldari ships which lose 25% of their dps when nit shooting kinetic? LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. Black Flag Society 230	Posted - 2014.04.22 20:20:00 - [5] - Quote That implies certain things about missiles which I don't feel are true. Observe how missiles work best in brawling range with webs on the target. Contrast with turrets which work best while kiting (even in scram range). So when we find complimentary ships and play styles we observe that 1. medium and large missiles have explosion velocities at 150m/s or lower and that most ships are faster than this natively except industrial ships. 2. sig radius for missiles is typically under a target of the same size catagory compare with turrets where if I'm not mistaken they're based on the average sig radius for a given target with armour tanking minmatar being slightly under and most caldari ships being slightly over this turret sig threshold. 3. the damage calculator for missiles favours the comparison of target velocity versus explosion velocity for the purposes of applying damage reductions. When the velocity ratio reaches or exceeds 1 then the formula compares explosion vs target sig radius. turrets suffer a linear degradation of applied dps due to range as the major fsctor while tracking determines likelihood of a shot landing. A stationary target is treated the same as a moving target only the relative transversals of the two ships really matters for tracking. those 3 simple thoughts in mind make a rapier/huginn/hyena or any new blood raider ship much more valuable to a missile gang than to turret gang as the velocity of your target dirrctly influences your applied dps while a turret user mostly only needs to orbit within 5% of his optimal. Similarly target painters are of limited utility to turret users unless they're shooting targets significantly smaller than their gun sig resolution - because missile users are highly unlikely to push a target under 200m/s in the first place the influence of sig which is factored second can pretty much be discarded. Turret users are more likely to benefit target painters in situations where they don't have established control of the field and where they're shooting afterburner equipped and/or small targets. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur Capital Storm. Black Flag Society 240	Posted - 2014.04.29 01:42:00 - [6] - Quote Which is a great idea until you see that the game itself is a series of pockets and choke points. Keeping range is a fine argument in those 30% of cases where you get to dictate the initial fight circumstances LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 254	Posted - 2014.05.19 04:13:00 - [7] - Quote That's an interesting graph but it doesn't tell you how or where those missiles were being used? By mass fleets of nano caracals against frigates? Scythe Fleet Issues against other cruisers (the only real missile kiter out there). And what about these new pirate ships coming out? I can make a cerberus functional with RLML on Sisi when using an XLASB and 1x LSE II but that's about where I draw the line on them. Since everyone naturally associates missiles with kinetic why are caldari one of the worst platforms for missiles to be mounted on? LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 254	Posted - 2014.05.19 06:47:00 - [8] - Quote Well the thing is about it you'll notice a peak dps on your average fit can hit nearly 1k dps. But sustained dps sits between 300 and 350. For reference a : ScFI does 370dps before reloads with RLML. with 3x BCS II Nopsrey: 370dps with kinetic.. 3x BCS II T1 Caracal: 410 with kinetic and 3x BCS II Navy Caracal: 490 with 3x BCS II Cerberus: 678 max dps tengu: 820 So the DPS stats are very nice, but what about over-all damage delivered and uptime? ScFI, Nosprey both have 4 launchers and deliver a max damage of 1209 volley for 20 volleys giving 24180 damage. Caracal: 5 launchers give 1008 damage per volley and ROF gives the extra dps. 20160 max damage Navy Caracal: 6 launchers, 1209 volley.. extra ROF give the dps here. 24180 damage Cerberus: 1587 per volley, 31894 damage max. Tengu: 6 launchers, 1598 volley. Total damage is 31960. Tengu expels its charges fastest. The NOsprey and ScFi the slowest. So now lets look at sustained dps Caracal: 215 NCaracal: 258 NOsprey: 220 ScFi: 220 Cerb: 348 Tengu: 383. So at a good 50x the cost of a caracal a Tengu gets nearly double the sustained dps and about 50% more actual damage per clip. This figure is before considering things like ammo-type gimping and all that other goodness. I'm sure I could build a massive graph of all medium missile users in the same vein but it's just not necessary right now. What I would say is from my own experience and exposure to the platform is that the RLML is an underperformer. Anecdotal graphs from CCP don't mean much without any context - the RLML is the WORST missile platform for sustained dps and only wins out on applied dps. If I could make a preliminary suggestion it would be at least to make the kinetic damage bonus on the T2/T3 a generic 5% missile damage bonus and give a bigger clip. If Rise and co. really want to keep the missile reload time then at least give us this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70yNAwUUsc0 The whole clip is expended straight away across the course of a few seconds. Now you can treat it like it was oversized artillery with 40s reload times BUT it delivers x-amount of damage downfield on a platform which: can be speed tanked, sig tanked and outrun. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 257	Posted - 2014.05.21 12:39:00 - [9] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: That's an interesting graph but it doesn't tell you how or where those missiles were being used? By mass fleets of nano caracals against frigates? Scythe Fleet Issues against other cruisers (the only real missile kiter out there). And what about these new pirate ships coming out? I can make a cerberus functional with RLML on Sisi when using an XLASB and 1x LSE II but that's about where I draw the line on them. Since everyone naturally associates missiles with kinetic why are caldari one of the worst platforms for missiles to be mounted on? It is also a totally useless metric when it has nothing to compare to. I'd like to see the usage of other types of weapons compared to RLML. RLML usage is greatly influenced by the fact there is no viable missile alternative. To get a true idea on how popular and balanced Rapid Launchers are in their current guise, there needs to be something to compare them to. We don't have that, so any statistics metrics or whatever you choose to call them are biased and have no value in judging whether they are balanced or not. I think the biggest thing has always been that missiles are balanced with EWAR in mind ie webs and painters while guns are balanced around size catagories. Nevermind that webs and painters help turrets to apply damage too but turrets are used in kiting activity to great affect while its accepted that missiles aren't very good at pretty much anything. I propose a radical new perspective for missiles of all sizes. They are brawling weapons, designed around operating under the influence of EWAR and hence when undocking a missile boat this is your #1 consideration. Is your fleet bringing EWAR? Yes/No? If yes; missiles are great because they hit resist holes, often from a great distance and never "miss" so they're extremely dependable. If no: does your ship have the speed/mass or other ability to keep your targets ability to maneuvre low? The lower your targets speed the better you do, simply crashing head first in to your opponent and then bumping them around can be enough. Fit a scram by default if you're undocking without friends - while a MWD doesn't affect applied dps the fact that they might outrun your missiles is enough reason for concern. https://zkillboard.com/kill/38405563/ Simply put - don't warp to zero on an opponent you haven't fought before, ESPECIALLY if you're in a kiter. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 259	Posted - 2014.05.21 13:58:00 - [10] - Quote i thought faction FOF already existed in amarr/gallente FW stations? also they have a thing about that reload time - the sustained dps needs to be lower than conventional weapons systems so that those conventional weapons remain valid. The point of contention Ive always had was the term "front loaded damage" and how it still takes 60 seconds to unload your damage and then 35 seconds to reload as opposed to dumping your damage in 20 seconds and taking 60 seconds to reload which encourages smarter engagements. LP store weapon cost rebalance

Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 259	Posted - 2014.05.21 14:40:00 - [11] - Quote it has to have lower sustained dps, that's the whole point. Kind of like artillery having pathetic DPS but super alpha. The laws of alpha between arty and missiles are similar just applied differently. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 259	Posted - 2014.05.21 14:50:00 - [12] - Quote I was talking about a cycle time such that the clip is emptied in 20 seconds. Reload time is 60 seconds. "moments of tension" and all that. We're talking about 1 missile per second for a total of 20-30k damage delivered in 20 seconds. giving 1000dps burst and a sustained dps of about 330, in both cases an improvement over current dps values and also you wont take as long to work out you're shooting the wrong ammo type. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 259	Posted - 2014.05.21 20:50:00 - [13] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: I was talking about a cycle time such that the clip is emptied in 20 seconds. Reload time is 60 seconds. "moments of tension" and all that. We're talking about 1 missile per second for a total of 20-30k damage delivered in 20 seconds. If you change the reload time to 60 seconds you might as well write these weapon systems off. It would be one of the only weapon systems to push 30k damage raw down your throat at 50-100km in under 30s. People are fixating on the reload time but the devil here is the total amount of damage downfield peaks absolutely at ~30k. No amount of overheating will ever affect that. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 261	Posted - 2014.05.22 03:56:00 - [14] - Quote You guys should seriously watch that video I have posted some time. The mechanic has existed for decades and only recieves complaints from people with no idea what they're doing. On sisi I kill vagabonds and cerbs with rlml quite easily. These are hacs with 50% more ehp than you standard cruiser getting smushed by what you call the weakest weapon system in the game. When I can I'll make a video for you to watch. .. or alternatively go look up some mwll vulture vids. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 261	Posted - 2014.05.22 10:32:00 - [15] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: People are fixating on the reload time... Yes, it's because long reloads SUCK. Long reload times do not add "interesting choices to game play" and are far from "Fun". A high of 25 mil HP destroyed in a week, compared to the Trillions of HP destroyed per week in TQ. I think that alone is the answer to all the questions relating to whether Rapid launchers are seen as a viable weapon system or not. Team FozRis - got it wrong. Maybe by the time my Grandchildren are old enough to take my place in New Eden, we will have decent missile systems. Right now, with the odd exception, Missiles are fail. Are you for real? Heavy missiles are bad, yes it's a given. HAMs are workable but need niche scenarios to push their full dps downstream. As for trillions of HP destroyed I don't think you can seriously expect to have a point there given supers push 25k dps and there are so many of them that it's been officially recognised as a problem. Titans aren't a pushover either. What about dreads? 10-15k dps a piece there too. Trillions of HP as a metric is just as meaningless without context considering we don't know the sample size, the time or the place or even what ships were used. Fozzie and Co got it wrong I'm not contesting that, but while you want more homogenisation between missiles and turrets I have consistently pushed for the change to go FURTHER towards being front loaded dps with longer reload times. If you see a problem on d-scan at 14au maybe by the time they actually land on grid you're ready to fight them. Not to mention all the millions of other minute details that can dramatically change how the outcome of a conflict goes. It really is far, far too easy and convenient to just default to "you lost before you undocked" lines of thinking when things like carrying a mobile depot to allow hot-swapping ammo and other general terms of preparation can solve so many problems. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 265	Posted - 2014.05.29 15:20:00 - [16] - Quote Harvey James wrote: i would suggest removing the 10% damage buff LM's got .... then increase ROF on LML's for the frigs then you can increase the ammo clip on RLML's .. this then makes the long reload time make a little more sense also reducing the ammo clips of HAMS and Heavy missile launchers might make them look less ridicilous.. Light missiles should get less rof and more damage. They're not a dps weapon they're a missile alternative to projectile artillery. Rlml have very high dps.as it is but if you look at how the complaint centralises around their ineffectiveness at engaging more than one target not due to dps but because their damage gets mostly expended on the first target there leaving only a small portion of potential damage available for the next target. If you increase the damage of the missile and drop the rof on regular lml to have the same dps over all you can pack more overall damage in to your load. Extrapolate to ship bonuses and rlml. Currently a tengu can spit out enough damage to kill an average cruiser. But it can't fight two cruisers. A good many cruisers also fit enough tank to take more than one load of kinetic as well. Some of this comes from missiles having explosion velocities that are far too low. Really a missile explosion should be nearly impossible to outrun yet a battleship can speed tank light missiles. Just to put things in perspective. In a perfect world a caracal can yes kill one or two frigates with its rlml but remember for an equivalent number of guns it does 30% less damage than a cerb. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 265	Posted - 2014.05.29 17:10:00 - [17] - Quote Let me debunk that comparison. Mechwarrior and eve use a similar way of outfitting your chosen war machine. They're not really that different in my eyes and what I see is a particular style of weapon that is clearly not working out for most people in its current state and that the answer has already existed for a long time. A rhml ship in this theoretical configuration would wipe out any dessie or frig in one volley.. and then be at the mercy of any new attackers for a time. Not to mention that missiles themselves I never said would be changed so all their application issues still exist its just a matter of the time period the potential damage is levied in. I can expand on this more later but to me aside from some obvious differences the two games share a lot of similarities and certain mechanics being borrowed at least for testing would go a long way. While Rise might not be reading this thread any more it wouldn't hurt to be able to have a server with maybe 2 solar systems where we can prototype things quickly. The changes to the module I propose are just xml values and as for server load issues should the idea take off smartbomb nets become a thing again as a counter. LP store weapon cost rebalance
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 290	Posted - 2014.06.10 08:47:00 - [18] - Quote It just occured to me each module has a "charges per cycle" value. Up it to 2 or 3 per cycle. Triple the ROF without changing anything. Now you increase missile count to 21 (or 24, or whatever multiple you want) and you get an uptime of 15-20 seconds and keep the 35 second reload time. Or increase reload time. Still waiting on SISI to get back up so I can make a couple of vids, been waiting a long time now. Tried to gank a gila in a tengu with RLML today. Messed up the warp and he micro'd away. Crucially I am finding the dps is still so very low on RLML. I'd far prefer to have much greater volley and reload more often than to have my 'unique' weapon system be out-dps'd by something that doesn't even use ammo. For the record, gila with 3x DDA II and hammerheads 630dps sustained, My tengu about 370dps sustained. The only strength of this weapon system is pushing damage downfield faster than it can be repped against but even OH'd my fit still doesn't come close to this. This is a pimp-fit tengu in a specialist configuration being outclassed by a t2 fit pirate ship. I really have to say I'm gobsmacked. FWIW if my scram had gone off in time I would have eventually killed him but that's only because of T3 tank. I'd like to go back here and look at some things. Quote: #691 Posted: 2014.05.19 06:47 \| Report Well the thing is about it you'll notice a peak dps on your average fit can hit nearly 1k dps. But sustained dps sits between 300 and 350. For reference a : ScFI does 370dps before reloads with RLML. with 3x BCS II Nopsrey: 370dps with kinetic.. 3x BCS II T1 Caracal: 410 with kinetic and 3x BCS II Navy Caracal: 490 with 3x BCS II Cerberus: 678 max dps tengu: 820 So the DPS stats are very nice, but what about over-all damage delivered and uptime? ScFI, Nosprey both have 4 launchers and deliver a max damage of 1209 volley for 20 volleys giving 24180 damage. Caracal: 5 launchers give 1008 damage per volley and ROF gives the extra dps. 20160 max damage Navy Caracal: 6 launchers, 1209 volley.. extra ROF give the dps here. 24180 damage Cerberus: 1587 per volley, 31894 damage max. Tengu: 6 launchers, 1598 volley. Total damage is 31960. Tengu expels its charges fastest. The NOsprey and ScFi the slowest. So now lets look at sustained dps Caracal: 215 NCaracal: 258 NOsprey: 220 ScFi: 220 Cerb: 348 Tengu: 383. Let's add the new Orthrus to that mix since I have a functional (and quite workable) fit for it. Orthrus: with merely TWO (2) t2 BCS gets 577 DPS and 384 sustained dps, with 2016 volley. With 3x BCS II it gets 631 peak, 430 sustained and 2077 volley. Across 20 volleys total damage downfield is 40320. The Orthrus with only 2x BCS II has 21.8% more total damage in volley than a Tengu or Cerberus. I have a distinct problem with this. The only ship I can see being universally powerful with RLML and not some fringe-case wannabe is the Orthrus and that's only because it's total damage per clip is high enough to kill many buffer-fit T1s. Fully selectable damage type. Now I am NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT advocating through this a nerf for the Orthrus. The RLML is still the common denominator for all these ships and it is only the orthrus's retartedly high damage bonus that makes the weapon system a solid choice. RLML has been shown repeatedly throughout this thread to be a sub-par performer and even now internally doesn't work when mounted on chassis' which otherwise should be considering this module. RLML does not perform properly for PVE because it doesn't have the raw ammo count to be productive against the grind. It doesn't work in PVP because it fires too slowly and outright doesn't deliver enough damage on most hulls. To make this comparison completely fair though I'm now going to re-do that list and include a generic triple BCSII fit on ALL hulls that can use missiles not excluding RLML. Any ship with a bonus to RLML will be given a fitting and its stats posted. Let's begin. I will post 2x tengu configurations because it comes in 5 and 6 launcher setups most typically. The 6 launcher set up is most likely PVE and not PVP. All other fits posted include scrams/kiting and other gear, none of these fits are vacuum wrapped. Sustained/Peak/Overheated/gross damage Huginn: 144/245/289/12100 Loki: 212/393/460/16160 Bellicose: 191/327/385/16160 Sacrilege: 239/409/481/20160 Legion: 240/368/433/20160 Caracal: 215/410/481/20160 NCaracal: 258/491/578/24180 NOsprey: 220/370/433/24180 ScFi: 220/370/433/24180 Gila: 240/368/433/24180 onyx: 250/384/451/25200 Tengu 5 launcher OH sub: 331/614/722/25200 Cerb: 348/678/722/31894 Tengu 6 launcher: 383/736/866/31960 Orthrus: 412/631/742/40320 This is not an exhaustive list, these are not max dps fits, this is for research purposes only. Orthrus gets 8360 more gross damage per clip than the next best performer which is a T3 ship with an extra launcher and about 200mil in subsystems. There's lots that's wrong with this equation. More than ever is the case for RLML dispensing their charges at a much higher ROF been stronger. in my next look at this I'm going to compare them to some turret using ships/fits and see what falls out. 782/5000 characters remaining. My fingers hurt, I need a coffee. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 293	Posted - 2014.06.11 02:21:00 - [19] - Quote Elusive Panda wrote: The RLML would be a good skirmishing platform if the ship that uses it the most had their RoF swapped for a Damage bonus instead. Half the "dps" bonus on the Caracal, Bellicose and the Cerb is useless with RLML, which are probably the best platforms for it. Right now it's still used because Heavy Missile are garbage and HAMs are not flexible enough for solo/micro gang engagement. The 50km range and good application are it's saving grace, but it could really shine with tweaking the stats of those 3 ships a bit. I think it's high time that the kinetic only bonus for caldari ships was addressed. It's a trivial matter to fit against it. Instead of trying to specifically omni tank you can try this on either a shield or an armour ship and see how it works. People typically fit for EM, kinetic and explosive and neglect thermal. For a caracal I like to have 1x invul,1x em ward, 1x thermal and 2x extender rigs. Thermal is still the hole but since most weapons have their damage spread over 2 damage types normally either EM or thermal anyway you're pretty safe. This particular set up has equal kinetic/thermal resists on the basis that I'm kiting and outside of optimal for hybrids. On an armour vexor there's 68/58/58/58 and thats with room to move thanks to reactive hardener. Shooting kinetic at this vexor because its your damage preference will push total resists up to nearly 80% on kinetic meaning your already bad dps gets worse. ROF is the current gimmick for DPS with the devs trying to make us googoo eyed over how it translates into slightly higher dps than raw volley but as the numbers show again and again especially for caracal a gross output of 20k in 50s and then 35s reload is too little to justify it. With the orthrus getting literally double the damage I really wonder why they made it that way and not just super ROF with like 50% higher ROF. For comparison to a caracal as above Caracal: 215/410/481/20160 Thorax w/ 250mm railguns and using plutonium: 405/422/497/50500. 2.5x the raw damage of a RLML caracal. 120s per railgun magazine. 2.4x as much uptime as a caracal. 5s reload. Caracal reloads after 50s and 20000 damage, after 85 seconds it has produced 20000 damage downstream at a rate of 235dps. After 135 seconds it has produced 40000 damage downstream. The Thorax by comparison has produced another 5000 damage for a total of 55500 damage in 135 seconds. Now if they're both MWDing and in a kiting scenario the Caracal loses dps just from explosion velocity so his 20000 is even lower yet again. A shield thorax is faster and has more EHP. Not looking good for the caracal. I'm really not convinced the RLML should be flown on anything without a damage multiplier. ROF bonuses are just not good for this weapon system and it should really be front loaded by firing either multiple charges or dumping all of its damage instantly and letting the missile algorithym deal with whether you kill the target or not instead of dragging out this already anemic damage profile further, as if being limited to maybe shooting their highest resist wasn't bad enough. A caracal only begins to creep ahead in raw damage after 3 reloads in which you have been in battle for minimum 164 seconds. In 164s a thorax has pushed 70k damage downfield. For comparison purposes I'm going to look at medium artillery for a second here. Rupture with 4x 720s shooting EMP ges 52k damage over 148 second. Stabber with same gets 42200 (although it has NO grid left for anything else). The RLML is one of the lowest dps systems in EVE and also one with the lowest overall damage produced. You can't do anything to mitigate speed tankers at longpoint range and the ships that the module was designed around (predominantly caldari ships) are too slow to kite effectively and often have less EHP than comparable ships that use weapons with higher damages. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 293	Posted - 2014.06.11 10:05:00 - [20] - Quote If the phoenix can have the curse of 5% kinetic/level removed, so can the rest. I fail to see how its game breaking. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing

Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 293	Posted - 2014.06.11 10:23:00 - [21] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: If the phoenix can have the curse of 5% kinetic/level removed, so can the rest. I fail to see how its game breaking. I'm in complete agreement. Rise and co. will probably cite usage stats (in a vacuum) or some other nonsense to justify not changing it. Lest we forget the phoenix costs like 4bil to fly once skillbooks are taken in to consideration not to mention the many months of training. Of course its usage was abysmally low - it was a bad dread and far far too pricey. More than that, some consistency between caldari ships and against minmatar ships. Why does the caracal get ROF while the NOSprey gets damage? The cerb gets damage? The Corax gets damage? The hawk gets damage? The kestrel gets (universal)damage? Why these inconsistencies on hulls where it really really matters that it's done right? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 293	Posted - 2014.06.11 10:45:00 - [22] - Quote My favourite part is how the original data for RLML was based on the idea that they would out-damage turrets for their clip and then have to reload - but I've just shown a number of turret based ships that even with their lowest dps guns disprove that. Not to mention bulk damage put downfield is still grossly in favour of the turrets. I'm not sure wtf Rise and Fozzie were smoking when they decided to settle on this design but it needs to be re-done because although the idea has merit they royally ****** up the execution. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 306	Posted - 2014.06.24 00:54:00 - [23] - Quote One thing I have just noticed after a quick brain fart is: navy HML vs T2 HML = 12% more missiles in the HML Navy HAM vs t2 HAM = 12% more missiles in the HAM Navy RLML vs T2 RLML = 4.5% more missiles? What? Is there even a point to running the navy versions of these launchers.. at all? You get less dps and one single cycle more sustained peak dps.. What am I missing here, Rise? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 307	Posted - 2014.06.24 22:36:00 - [24] - Quote Well you could, I mean they do log on to SISI occasionally. Getting them to admit they have poorly balanced the HML and new RLML will be another story altogether. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 308	Posted - 2014.06.24 23:48:00 - [25] - Quote What's wrong with them is exactly what I've shown, they get out-dps'd by other long range weapon platforms. All I have ever asked for is to change them to being like SRM and MRM. It would fix them and you wouldn't have to change anything except for the ROF/charges per shot. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 313	Posted - 2014.06.29 06:37:00 - [26] - Quote It won't be the fix they implement without putting them back to their old stats. And they won't do that either (it's exactly why they changed them). Under your proposed model a caracal will have the same sustained dps as an armour thorax but better application over range. I do wonder whether or not Chessurs super-cerb was what actually spooked Rise and Co. to change rlml or whether this was some gorilla in the mist they're still too scared to discuss. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 314	Posted - 2014.06.29 11:48:00 - [27] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Rapid Missile are working as intended. Stop crying. They're working as intended? Like ****? I won't stop posting here until they recognise that I'm unhappy. I can tell you that they've already admitted the change produced far less enthusiasm from the people actually using these weapons than they expected. RLMLs don't: fire fast enough have enough rounds reload fast enough do enough raw damage on enough hulls have low cost fittings like they used to To fix all of these problems would yes obviously be totally game breaking. So fix one of them. Modules have the ability to fire more than 1 round at a time so let RLML be it. The only weapon with more 'burst' could be bombs. Which are coincidentally also a missile skill. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 343	Posted - 2014.08.04 01:23:00 - [28] - Quote Now trying to use RLML for PVE. Have been trying for several months. Expending 10 shots per clip on some cruisers, this is with a fully specced tengu with 5% implants and all the trim. Would really like to see ships with bonuses to RLML swap any ROF bonus for raw damage, to the same effect. ie currently tengu is 5%/level kinetic 7.5% ROF swap to 12.5% (or whatever) kinetic damage for light missiles, 5%/level for HML and HAM. 7.5% ROF for HML and HAM and no bonus to LM. No range bonus needed. Noone here is stupid, RLML is a PVP weapon in the same way that blasters are pvp weapon, using the wrong tool for PVE only makes you stupid. Of course PVE itself is stupid too but two wrongs don't make a right. I will never let this topic die. I ran the numbers, did the graphs, have made my suggestions and there has been nothing but silence from CCP. RLML might see use in PVP that doesn't mean they are effective. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.