Player Features and Ideas Discussion

It's an interesting idea, but it might give this particular weapon an unfair advantage once you settle on the damage type. Lasers are the most limited for damage type, followed by hybrids and projectiles - with missiles having the most flexibility. To avoid unbalancing any of the other weapon systems, I think the 10-second reload/swap for missiles needs to be retained.

In truth, we just need a little bit of rebalancing to the existing light-medium missile-based weapon systems. Something along these lines:

• Rockets: 20m radius, 170 m/sec velocity (+20), 33 damage
• Light missile: 60m radius (+20), 150 m/sec velocity (-20), 83 damage
• Heavy assault missile: 100m radius (-25), 125 m/sec velocity (+24), 100 damage
• Heavy missile: 125m radius (-15), 100 m/sec velocity (+19), 135 damage

They work fine in solo or small gangs, anything bigger you use something else, or logi. With ASBs you can't hold out against medium to big gangs. Weapons aren't like ASBs, with a weapon if you aren't shooting you can't win. with an ASB recharging you can still engage and might just pull of a win, might not too. No chance if you aren't putting out DPS. ASBs work well in fast engagements, anything else you are in trouble. These you will have 40secs to 50secs to kill your target, if you don't then you have 40secs to reload, and you are dead. I rather have something that reloads in 10sec and I have to shoot a couple times more then something that takes 40secs to reload, and if you don't kill your target(s) in the first load you have no chance.

I don't claim to know everything about missiles (or even very much about them, sometimes) but this looks pretty good IMO.

Your logic is sound, "yes i quote startrek" if your comment about ASB's was pointed in my direction, i just warnt to let you know that the point was not about survival, but more like a hint to what may be done, once given the chanch. ;)

Everything you said I have said or agreed with throughout this post. RMLs are OP, and need fixed. Adding 40secs to reload isn't fixing them, it's making them worthless and doing the quick fix. CCP needs to sit down and come up with a REAL way to fix Rapids, rebalance HAMs, HMLs, and overhaul defenders and FoF. I agree with everything you said.

I did the test the way I did because it is a basic test. I can't use T2 ammo in a test liek this. That would b like have 2 rifles and using special ammo in one and regular ammo in the other, it shows favor to one and not the other. Here I used Caldari Navy ammo for both, had 3 armor ships, and 3 shield ships, fits were'nt changed bwtween missile types, and were tested with MWD on and MWD off with both missile types. The test ship changed nothing but launchers. I also do have to fits for al ships tested, I just can't link them on the forum as it only brings up ship type. If you'd like those let me know and I'll mail you them also. The Cerb used to test both was nothing but 3 BCUs and the launchers. I didn't add other variable i.e. TPs, rigs, webs, etc because that isn't what the test is for. It was a basic test to compare to weapon systems, nothing more. If you'd like to see the full test, with ship fits, and etc let me know.

Well you are wrong, RMLs are great against cruisers, and have shown to work better against them then HMLs and HAMs again and again, hints why they are being nerfed and as I have tested them on the REAL server and seen that they are OP, I'm stop stupid I am someone who instead of insulted others and complaining baout loosing your perfect weapon for cruiser and down ships, look at the facts. I have pointed out about a million times the 3 reason why they are OP. They are sorry but it's true, I didn't want to believe it either but it is true.
Even scrammed and webbed HAMs won't do what RMLs do against T1 cruisers, and they will still be pretty much a tie against HACs, against faction ships HAMs did great, but as faction ships are being rebalanced I wouldn't hold your breathe on HAMs doing so great against them after either.

Thaddeus, I notice you still have your hands. As long as you've decided to keep them, maybe you could stop using them to shiptoast? It's really only serving to derail what is attempting to be a productive and civil conversation that absolutely no devs care at all about anymore.

Anyway, rapid launchers aren't OP - the missiles they fire are, especially compared to how much better those missiles are than their next-size-up counterparts. Although, are cruises really that bad?

@ elitatwo - Now see, that doesn't look quite right at all. Why are you giving HAMs and Heavies the same explosion velocity? I too would like my artillery to have the same tracking as my autocannons. Also, what does frigates using light missiles have to do with what the missiles get fired at?

If the missiles they fire are OP that would make them OP, hmmmm....

Not really, but ok. Also for someone who says they don't know much about missiles you sure have a lot to say about it. The Launchers are OP, as with T1, faction, or Furies they all do will against cruisers and down and have no issues with target speed. And as missiles don't need a new launcher type, they just need HAMs and HMLs rebalanced, Rapids fixed and Defeners and FoFs overhauled. But again so you never look at facts or use reason, I doubt it matters what others say.

Er, thanks… I think. I'll give a bit more explanation behind my numbers and you can ponder them.

• Rockets: 20m radius, 170 m/sec velocity (+20), 33 damage
• Light missile: 60m radius (+20), 150 m/sec velocity (-20), 83 damage
• Heavy assault missile: 100m radius (-25), 125 m/sec velocity (+24), 100 damage
• Heavy missile: 125m radius (-15), 100 m/sec velocity (+19), 135 damage

I swapped the explosion velocity bonus between rockets and light missiles because rockets are kind of the "HAM" equivalent and should be a bit more effective than light missiles in terms of damage application. The reason I increased the explosion radius on light missiles and substituted the rocket explosion velocity is because they're a bit too effective against, well… everything. To get the previous performance you'd need to run some rigor and flare rigs - so the idea is to have a bit of a tradeoff (as it should be).

As for heavy and heavy assault missiles, the issue is damage application. Heavy assaults should outperform heavies because there's already a range and damage tradeoff, hence why I dropped the explosion radius on heavy assaults to 100(-25) and 125(-15) on heavies. I also increased the explosion velocity on both, again giving heavy assaults better damage application than heavies.

The end result is that heavy assault missiles become very effective against cruiser and even destroyer-sized targets, especially on something like a Navy Drake where they receive a 25% explosion radius bonus. With rigors and flares, L4 skills and a few implants they'll probably outperform the new rapid light missile launchers in terms of sustained damage. As for heavies, they become a more effective at longer ranges, but they'll really shine in combination with rigors, flares and target painters.
…..

I suspect one reason RLMLs became as prevalent as they did was because they could essentially forego the use of missile rigs or target painters, where all the other missile systems relied on a combination of rigs, webs and target painters. It was implied that something radical would happen with RLMLs, and I think the current proposal is a better alternative than simply nerfing a weapon systems into oblivion (been there, done that). Rubicon is out tomorrow and I've got a bunch of Faction rapid light missile launchers to put through their paces, so it should be interesting at least.