Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
13 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

[Summer] RLML and HML balance pass

First post First post First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2017-04-01 14:30:52 UTC
Hello everyone and happy Saturday!

Today I'm here to start collecting community feedback on a potential package of missile balance tweaks. These changes aren't confirmed yet and don't even have a release date, but if we do decide to go forward with them they would potentially arrive sometime in the summer.

The goal of these changes is to help improve the balance between the cruiser-sized missile systems and make the choice of what missiles to fit more interesting. We have also been hearing from you folks that Rapid Light Missiles are continuing to feel quite oppressive in their extremely strong combination of burst dps, range and application.

Here's the package of changes we are considering at this time:

  • Increase Rapid Light and Rapid Heavy launcher reload time from 35s to 40s (~4% sustained dps reduction with no burst damage reduction). This change would reset the rapid launcher reload time back to the original values from when they were first converted to a burst damage system. It is a slight reduction to sustained dps while not impacting burst damage

  • Change ship missile range bonuses to not apply to undersize missiles
  • This would mean that the following ships would have their range bonuses only apply to Heavy and Heavy Assault Missiles: Orthrus, Caracal, Cerberus, Onyx, Osprey Navy Issue, Cyclone, Drake, Drake Navy Issue
  • The Barghest range bonus would also be changed to only impact Cruise Missiles and Torpedoes
  • The Mordu flight time reduction would also no longer apply to undersized missiles
  • This change would only affect range bonuses (missile velocity and missile flight time) not damage bonuses

  • Increase all Heavy Missile damage by 5.6%. This would be a general buff to HMLs and more than compensate for the longer reload time on RHMLs leading to a slight buff for them as well.


As I mentioned above we don't have a proposed release date for these changes yet but we want to start gathering community feedback and get the discussion started. Thanks and happy Saturday!

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

C C P Alliance
#2 - 2017-04-01 14:32:15 UTC
Reserved

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#3 - 2017-04-01 14:36:56 UTC
HYDRA RELOADED
#4 - 2017-04-01 14:40:13 UTC
Th e problem is the burst damage killing most attack cruisers and similar anti support options while having twice the EHP as those options, please reduce the reload time to 30 seconds but reduce the clip size to 17 instead for T2. This retains almost identical Dps to now but allows ships like the rail Thorax, stabber, omen and other anti support ships to survive a reload.

Also, please, please consider increasing the fittings because the main issue with rapid light ships right now is they can fit absolutely everything with no sacrifice, mid to long cruiser sniper ranges, close range turret burst DPS, with high EHP. Increasing the reload time won't address any of this. Most people ping and reload while in Warp in bigger fights.

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

WE FORM V0LTA
#5 - 2017-04-01 14:42:01 UTC
1st april. I can only assume this is fake. No more ships would use rapid light anymore with these change, and wtf barghest without rapid heavy?
Brothers of Tangra
#6 - 2017-04-01 14:43:04 UTC
GENT wrote:
HAhahahha good one.



I actually don't think this is a joke.

Badly timed release of this information as no one will believe it? Yes.

Joke? Nope.


I can already tell you a potential problem right off the bat. Removing the bonuses for RLMLs and RHMLs from certain ships will screw up doctrines across the board. I fear that this will render these weapons useless; unless there is a reduction to their fitting costs to allow them to fit on Destroyer and Battlecruiser Hulls (with applicable bonuses to those hulls). I pick up on the fact the Corax is perceived by the playerbase to be underutilized. RLML Corax could become a thing as well as RHML Drakes.

"Threefold is the time's pace: the future comes not in haste, the present is gone arrow fast, eternally still remains the past."

#7 - 2017-04-01 14:47:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Gorski Car
Increase all Heavy Missile damage by 5.6%

lmao

HMLs still on death row waiting to get exonerated next appeal is possible in 4 years

Collect this post

Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2017-04-01 14:49:41 UTC
I think he got a few of you with that! The best April fools jokes are subtle enough to possibly be real as opposed to the outrageous.

Still though, would be nice to have a heavy missile buff although for application so they can apply to cruiser sized targets more effectively.
#9 - 2017-04-01 14:50:31 UTC
Having tested these changes out, this seems like a great idea.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#10 - 2017-04-01 14:51:28 UTC
May'n Nome wrote:
GENT wrote:
HAhahahha good one.



I actually don't think this is a joke.

Badly timed release of this information as no one will believe it? Yes.

Joke? Nope.


I can already tell you a potential problem right off the bat. Removing the bonuses for RLMLs and RHMLs from certain ships will screw up doctrines across the board. I fear that this will render these weapons useless; unless there is a reduction to their fitting costs to allow them to fit on Destroyer and Battlecruiser Hulls (with applicable bonuses to those hulls). I pick up on the fact the Corax is perceived by the playerbase to be underutilized. RLML Corax could become a thing as well as RHML Drakes.


I duno Fozzie is pretty trolly, and I think he knows this would be a bad change.
Brave Collective
#11 - 2017-04-01 14:53:39 UTC
Assuming that this isn't an April Fools joke, if you're going to nerf rapid launcher range then maybe buffing Heavy Assault Missile Range would be a good way to promote some new gameplay around it. They're pretty underused atm because of their pitiful range, but with a small to moderate range bonus they could replace RLMLs on some ships.

"For most people, the sky's the limit... For those who love aviation, the sky, is home."

-Cheers! :D

WE FORM V0LTA
#12 - 2017-04-01 14:55:39 UTC
I'd rather keep rapids like they are now, but increase the powergrid required to be much higher. This would keep rapid lights as arguably the strongest missile system, but require serious fitting sacrifices. For example, if T2 RLMLs required 140PG instead of 77PG, a Caracal would only be able to fit one LSE with two ancil rigs, which would reduce its EHP by 9k. This would give rapids a real drawback to go with their amazing DPS and versatility.
Shadow Cartel
#13 - 2017-04-01 15:02:40 UTC
please seriously consider deleting rapid launchers. look at the stats on a RLML cruiser, then ask yourself what the point of T1 destroyers is
#14 - 2017-04-01 15:06:07 UTC
Increase all Heavy Missile damage by 5.6%

Lady Yatolila, retainer of her Lady Kadesh and Khanid Royal House

Gallente Federation
#15 - 2017-04-01 15:10:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Henry Plantgenet
What would this do for oversized missile launchers?
Will the reload bonus of the jackdaw still affect my rapid light missile launchers on said hull? Twisted

you know something like:
[Jackdaw, *Jacques D'aw]
Navy Micro Auxiliary Power Core
Navy Micro Auxiliary Power Core
Thukker Micro Auxiliary Power Core

5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive
EM Ward Amplifier II
EM Ward Amplifier II
Missile Guidance Computer II
Missile Guidance Computer II

Rapid Light Missile Launcher II
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II
Light Missile Launcher II
Light Missile Launcher II
Light Missile Launcher II

Small Ancillary Current Router I
Small Ancillary Current Router II
Small Ancillary Current Router II




Caldari Navy Scourge Light Missile x20
Missile Range Script x3
Scourge Fury Light Missile x20
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2017-04-01 15:14:14 UTC
Yes, finally the ******* RLML nurf!

please buff HML application not damage and also buff the range of HAMs a tiny bit please
skill urself
#17 - 2017-04-01 15:23:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
a pretty good change re: nerfing rapid lights; however i think heavies need help in a different department than raw damage. they are currently destroyed by a single smartbomb regardless of how they are grouped, and you don't need to be particularly skilled to do it either.
here's me just turning on my smarties and destroying torps: http://i.imgur.com/5x7IDBP.gif note that grouping does not matter as the missiles take 100% increased damage for every missile added beyond the first.

another thing i'd ask while you're tweaking medium missiles, would it be possible for an extra launcher on the cyclone? it is currently massively underpowered in the firepower department, and only really has a slight speed advantage to show for it.
it has only 6.66 launchers where its sister ships [drake, brutix, hurricane, harbinger] all have 9. an extra launcher would bring it up to 8 launchers, and allow it to join the ferox which also has 8.

also agreed with RLML needing a fitting change, i would choose cpu++ personally as it's more missiles to control
Tactical-Retreat
#18 - 2017-04-01 15:31:12 UTC
Awful.

Meanwhile you have stuff like live-unboarding into neutral bowheads in war time, neutral risk-free command ships, machariels with selectable damage type, immunity to neut and cruiser warp and subwarp speed.

But suure, go after RHML lol.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

#19 - 2017-04-01 15:37:44 UTC
Altrue wrote:

machariels with selectable damage type


Tell me more Idea

Lady Yatolila, retainer of her Lady Kadesh and Khanid Royal House

Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2017-04-01 15:39:21 UTC
Gotta say on the believabilily scale this April fools ranks about a 4/10, not even you could be stupid enough to think this is a good idea Fozziewick.
13 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump