These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon] Rapid Missile Launchers - v2

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3041 - 2013-12-10 19:15:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Fourteen Maken
I get 271dps with CN scourge and 3 BCU's... tank is awful because I don't have enough PG to fit a lse (no advanced weapon upgrades) so i get 12k EHP. costs 24million isk before I fitted rigs, or put faction ammo in the hold dosen't seem worth it Cry

[Caracal, New Setup 1]
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Damage Control II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Disruptor II
Medium Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron

Prototype 'Arbalest' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Prototype 'Arbalest' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Prototype 'Arbalest' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Prototype 'Arbalest' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Prototype 'Arbalest' Heavy Assault Missile Launcher I, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#3042 - 2013-12-10 19:30:50 UTC
[Caracal, HAM]
Damage Control II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Warp Disruptor II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I

Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile

Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I

Warrior II x2

Use a 1% PG implant with AWU IV. Switch disruptor for scrambler, web for painter as you see fit.
1881 m/s, 25k overloaded EHP, 395 selectable DPS to almost 30 km, 309 DPS with Jav to 40ish km, 464 DPS to 20 km with Rage.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3043 - 2013-12-10 19:51:49 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
[Caracal, HAM]
Damage Control II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Warp Disruptor II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I

Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Assault Missile

Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I

Warrior II x2

Use a 1% PG implant with AWU IV. Switch disruptor for scrambler, web for painter as you see fit.
1881 m/s, 25k overloaded EHP, 395 selectable DPS to almost 30 km, 309 DPS with Jav to 40ish km, 464 DPS to 20 km with Rage.


for some reason with my skills i'd need a 5% pg implant and it costs 200million.

I'll have to stick with RLML until I get around to training for Advanced weapon upgrades, HAM is just not working out with my skills. I hate to do it, but here's another one for the metrics. Pirate
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3044 - 2013-12-10 19:52:11 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Buffing the raw DPS of heavy missiles will have a major effect on their damage against large, slow targets, while having very minimal effect against smaller, faster targets (30 DPS to 33 DPS yay!). It would not fix the current situation. It would merely make them more popular against structures, battleships, and capitals (which is already what they are best at) while leaving them near useless for all other situations.

The only problem is that this potentially skews the new rapid heavy missile launchers, because they benefit most from damage - not rate of fire. Torpedoes are now effectively useless.


I'm confused. I'm arguing against a raw DPS buff. Heavy missile damage application is what needs to be addressed not raw damage.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3045 - 2013-12-10 19:58:07 UTC
Last chart for a bit… promise. Lol

Caracal RHML-HAM Comparison

This one is specifically for Caracal users. I didn't include the original RLMLs because, well - it's depressing - and you've already been kicked enough with the last update...

I've highlighted the ideal choice (bright red and bright blue) depending on application, ie: frigates - RLML Precision; cruisers - HAM Javelin. Rigs were a T1 hydraulic, T1 rigor and T1 flare for both. With Precision LMs, you gain almost 100% damage application without the use of electronic warfare, but at the expense of range (36.4km); Faction will give you less damage application but 72.8km range (and you could probably swap-out the hydraulic for an EM shield rig instead). For HAMs, Javelin all the way. Less damage application than Faction, but you get a really decent 52.4km range (which compares favorably to the unmodified 63.3km Faction RLMLs).

If you opt for RLMLs I wouldn't even bother with a target painter or web. A single TP is a definite must for HAMs though, as this will greatly improve damage application against everything (particularly small targets). A web for HAM Javelins defeats the purpose of clawing back any range loss from switching from RLMLs. Just for kicks I included HAM Rage, but these really only shine against battlecruisers and battleships. You could probably improve this with rigors, flares and some electronic warfare component - but this will greatly weaken your tank and basically place you at point-blank firing range for turrets.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3046 - 2013-12-10 20:05:32 UTC
Here I am with my fully loaded RLML Caracal and I just calculated that even with faction ammo I have a total of 9,680 potential scourge dps in the tubes before I need to reload. Not impressed
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3047 - 2013-12-10 20:07:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I'm confused. I'm arguing against a raw DPS buff. Heavy missile damage application is what needs to be addressed not raw damage.

Sorry, I'm agreeing with you - a straight DPS buff solves nothing for heavy missiles - and has the potential put rapid heavy launchers over the top. Unfortunately, we're looking at the same scenario for improving damage application to heavy missiles, because this potentially turns battleships into cruiser killers and frigate maulers. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing (hey, I'm not objecting…), but this will lead to another round of missile vs. turret discussions - and there's already growing resentment with having a cruiser-class (bonused) weapons platform for a battleship.

I have a sneaky suspicion that the revised RLML/RHMLs with reduced ammunition capacity and 40-second reload were to pacify the growing turret animosity towards RLMLs and to prevent same with the first iteration of RHMLs. Not that I agree; I think both should've been shelved for a January update where we could've explored other options. They're now such a mess and have wrought such havoc with players that I'm not sure either are salvageable.

Fourteen Maken wrote:
Here I am with my fully loaded RLML Caracal and I just calculated that even with faction ammo I have a total of 9,680 potential scourge dps in the tubes before I need to reload. Not impressed

Javelin HAMs could be your new friend...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3048 - 2013-12-10 20:11:09 UTC
Really Arthur, the turret users in this thread have been nothing but supportive. Oh wait... Lol

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3049 - 2013-12-10 20:28:13 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:

Sorry, I'm agreeing with you - a straight DPS buff solves nothing for heavy missiles - and has the potential put rapid heavy launchers over the top. Unfortunately, we're looking at the same scenario for improving damage application to heavy missiles, because this potentially turns battleships into cruiser killers and frigate maulers. Not that this is necessarily a bad thing (hey, I'm not objecting…), but this will lead to another round of missile vs. turret discussions - and there's already growing resentment with having a cruiser-class (bonused) weapons platform for a battleship.


Isn't that the idea behind RHMLs? To be a cruiser killer? Right now they really aren't. So I don't see a problem. And really a 5-10% buff to explosion velocity and radius isn't going to do all that much in terms of frigate killing. You will still almost certainly fail to kill a frig with any kind of tank and/or speed before the reload timer of doom kicks in.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3050 - 2013-12-10 20:50:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonaura
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
]Your numbers always consider worse cases for missiles (AB Stabber with no rigs for the win...)

Secondly, the Thorax have a bonus to tracking speed. Damage application of railgun Thorax compare to damage application of Navy Caracal.

Yet, your Thorax fit, with close to no tank (3slots armor tank is light), AB for no mobility but the double web, will be good against a brawling frigate or two, but will easily be tackled by a long range frigate which will have then all the time she needs to kill your drones.

With an AB, you will *never* decrease transversale enough to hit a MWD frigate. Your Thorax fit of reference is a one trick poney with far less versatility than any missile cruiser have.



Ah, yet again, here I find myself with Uncle Bouh, by a warm fireplace stretched out on a bear rug. The bear looks pretty pissed off about it all. I'll wait while you add that to your bio :)

First off, just a few pages back, I was demonstrating figures against three different cruisers - Caracal, Thorax and Stabber. Do I have to include the entire menagerie of ships in my figures?

If I've used the stabber before, it was because that is the very ship that Heavy Precisions and RLML are meant to hit very well - given that all other missiles hit them very poorly. As discussed - Heavy Precisions don't even get close to hitting properly against a cruiser - a ship the weapons are designed to hit reasonably.

A Caracal with only one weapon system, precious few mid slots and a 40 second reload to change ammo, isn't a one trick pony?

You're previously said Rails on the Thorax can't shoot below 20km - I've actually tested them and seen that its more like 5km. if you fit the smallest ones - even closer. You've previously said they can't shoot as far as missiles - they can, and you've previously said drones are useless against a condor. Having actually flown a kiting condor dozens of times, I can tell you warrior drones are my worst nightmare. Sure I can shoot them, but you try doing that, while keeping range properly, not getting caught / losing point, and shooting them is not a quick process, I will probably be dead if your drone skills are any good. Frankly my arse twitches when I see those incoming.

As for the transversal - I've typically placed the gun settings in the EFT stuff, actually in situations where transversal would be affecting them very highly and used those DPS numbers - I haven't picked the 'best' gun situations. If you don't use tracking enhancers / computer / rigs, then they tend to 'peak' at certain ranges, where as the former items will mean that peak is far more protracted - essentially you don't need to change ammo so much / know your ranges well.

I can't help it if Thorax pilots choose not to use rails, because everyone is in love with on paper DPS of blasters and 5 hammerheads. But 5 ECM drones / 5 Warriors is clearly a combination that would protect against solo kiting frigates if you are solo.

Actually there is an interesting fight here a friend linked earlier doing just this - once he remembered :)

http://www.twitch.tv/dantesi/c/3369338

I ended up having a nice chat with Dantesi (even if he was wearing just underpants he said) and will hopefully jump into some of his gangs as he doesn't live to far away from my homeplate.

Quote:
I don't know what to say if you can't counter a Thorax fleet with a Moa fleet : the only advantage of Thorax vs Moa is utility, largely compensated with firepower, resilience, resistances, passive shield recharge + front loaded repair of the Osprey (+cap transfer). These always have been the advantages of shield in fact. In fleet, utility can go on support ships but firepower and resilience can't.


Did you really just bring in passive shield recharge into your argument of why a Moa is more win in a FW fight than the Thorax? A ship that when buffer fit, has almost twice the signature size of a Thorax, and is also slower? You do understand how that works right? Caldari need a freaking resistance bonus given those drawbacks. It also does less DPS than the Thorax, although it can reach better with the Blasters, but realistically MWD use is required - something its not cap stable doing for more than a minute after you've lost cap warping in.

Again, your corp killboard does not suggest that you guys are losing gangs to HAM fit Caracal's in the way you are describing. Close range is not really making good use of a Caracal in FW, but given Heavy's are so poor, there is little choice these days.

Having flown the Guardian an awful lot, I can appreciate the front load mechanic of shields. Those 4.5 seconds for armor reps to kick in feels like an eternity some fights. But this is countered by the fact that the signatures on shield ships are also much higher, so you take more damage - faster. But I think its fair to say that the end of cycle delay for works fine when done right.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3051 - 2013-12-10 20:58:03 UTC
dam lost caracal and 100mil pod testing them out Cry

Couldn't get any solo frigs or destroyers locked quick enough before they warped off, I managed to get an Atron pointed but he overloaded his mwd and was out of o/h disruptor range just as I got him in structure X . The only one that stayed was an Algos and I found out a few seconds later why; he had a gang of friends already en route to the plex with ecm and a Vexor. Killed the Algos but died in a ball of fire soon after

Needs more ammo the clips, 16 rounds is nowhere near enough to justify a 40second reload; please put an extra 3 or 4 rounds in the clips
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#3052 - 2013-12-10 20:58:09 UTC
I really don't get why you even bother to respond to Bouh anymore. His claims are nonsensical in the extreme and clearly come from someone who hates missiles and wants them to fundamentally suck.
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#3053 - 2013-12-10 21:00:03 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
I really don't get why you even bother to respond to Bouh anymore. His claims are nonsensical in the extreme and clearly come from someone who hates missiles and wants them to fundamentally suck.


Because I have a bad feeling CCP Rise believes him lol

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#3054 - 2013-12-10 21:36:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Moonaura wrote:
Really Arthur, the turret users in this thread have been nothing but supportive. Oh wait... Lol

Look, drones… Lol

Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Isn't that the idea behind RHMLs? To be a cruiser killer? Right now they really aren't.

With the first iteration, I thought so. Now, I'm not entirely sure.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
XvXTeacherVxV
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#3055 - 2013-12-10 21:48:06 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:


They're not fun. Regardless of their combat utility, a weapon system whose user is permanently worried about a 40 s reload, even just to change damage type, is not fun to use. It's deeply frustrating, aggravating and stressful to know that you're just a few seconds away from being mostly useless for 40 s. Even if you'd just blapped two AFs with your 18 volleys, the fear and worry of what might happen during the next 40 s still means that they're not fun. Straight

The frontloaded damage and burst DPS is a lovely idea for a new mechanic, but it just doesn't work in practice, at least not with the current numbers.

And please sort HMs out. And the damn Phoenix.


+1
Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#3056 - 2013-12-10 22:10:18 UTC
Moonaura wrote:
Having flown the Guardian an awful lot, I can appreciate the front load mechanic of shields. Those 4.5 seconds for armor reps to kick in feels like an eternity some fights. But this is countered by the fact that the signatures on shield ships are also much higher, so you take more damage - faster. But I think its fair to say that the end of cycle delay for works fine when done right.
So, on the one hand the Thorax will track everything perfectly at almost any range, but the signature of the Moa is more relevant than resistances or front loaded shield boost ?

And a plated Thorax will either be faster than a Moa but a lot less resilient, or a bit less resilient and a bit faster...

And no, the Thorax don't have more dps than the Moa unless you factor drones in. The Thorax can't fit 250mm railguns BTW if he want any kind of tank.

As for the cruisers you took for your tests, they were all attack cruisers with lower signature than combat cruisers and a lot faster to compensate for their lower tank. The only combat cruiser people ever showed here was an AB Rupture. So you see : you just showed that cruisers designed to take reduced damage from missiles do take reduced damage from missiles.

That's what I'm saying for dozens of pages now : using a ship or a module designed to reduce incoming missiles damage is not a good baseline to study missiles damage application. Your numbers are biased.

Yet, diging through numbers and the missile damage formula, I discover something intereting : the missile damage curve over speed is steep, so when the speed start to reduce missile damage, it's quickly a huge reduction. And on the other hand, cruisers have seen their speed increased a lot in the rebalance.

So, looking at numbers, heavy missiles might have fallen a bit too far on the curve.

What puzzle me though with Arthur's numbers is that nobody tryed to analyze the data. Everyone seems happy to see whatever he want to see but nobody explained it whereas this is what is actually interesting and what we can debate on.
Dr Sraggles
The Covenant of Blood
#3057 - 2013-12-10 22:25:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Sraggles
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
I revised the original comparison with a 4th graph showing base damage application (no rigs or electronic warfare). I've included the amended portion here. The results are… intriguing, but I'll let viewers draw their own conclusions.
…..

Tengu Missile Comparison, T2 Missiles
As an added bonus, I've included a comparison with T2 ammunition (no rigs or electronic warfare). It's kind of an interesting graph, because it really shows under which scenarios Precision, Fury, Javelin or Rage really shine. I was actually surprised to see how well Fury LMs outperformed both Precision and Fury HMs on cruisers (truly scary…) HAMs seem to benefit most from Rage ammunition against battlecruisers and battleships.


Arthur, we need Javelin Faction Missiles on the graphs for a complete discussion please. Thx so much for your fine work so far.

Been thinking about a more detailed response to what the graphs show and would love to have the final piece of the puzzle displayed.

best regards
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3058 - 2013-12-10 22:27:08 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Last chart for a bit… promise. Lol

Caracal RHML-HAM Comparison

This one is specifically for Caracal users. I didn't include the original RLMLs because, well - it's depressing - and you've already been kicked enough with the last update...

I've highlighted the ideal choice (bright red and bright blue) depending on application, ie: frigates - RLML Precision; cruisers - HAM Javelin. Rigs were a T1 hydraulic, T1 rigor and T1 flare for both. With Precision LMs, you gain almost 100% damage application without the use of electronic warfare, but at the expense of range (36.4km); Faction will give you less damage application but 72.8km range (and you could probably swap-out the hydraulic for an EM shield rig instead). For HAMs, Javelin all the way. Less damage application than Faction, but you get a really decent 52.4km range (which compares favorably to the unmodified 63.3km Faction RLMLs).

If you opt for RLMLs I wouldn't even bother with a target painter or web. A single TP is a definite must for HAMs though, as this will greatly improve damage application against everything (particularly small targets). A web for HAM Javelins defeats the purpose of clawing back any range loss from switching from RLMLs. Just for kicks I included HAM Rage, but these really only shine against battlecruisers and battleships. You could probably improve this with rigors, flares and some electronic warfare component - but this will greatly weaken your tank and basically place you at point-blank firing range for turrets.


Awesome

I have a lot of skills to level up first but I think your right; looks like Javelin HAM's are the way forward for Caracals now, I can see them being useful defending medium plexes, pity the fittings are so tight I really need near perfect skills to get the best out of them.

and thanks, at least now I know what to train towards Big smile
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#3059 - 2013-12-10 22:56:47 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Last chart for a bit… promise. Lol

Caracal RHML-HAM Comparison

This one is specifically for Caracal users. I didn't include the original RLMLs because, well - it's depressing - and you've already been kicked enough with the last update...

I've highlighted the ideal choice (bright red and bright blue) depending on application, ie: frigates - RLML Precision; cruisers - HAM Javelin. Rigs were a T1 hydraulic, T1 rigor and T1 flare for both. With Precision LMs, you gain almost 100% damage application without the use of electronic warfare, but at the expense of range (36.4km); Faction will give you less damage application but 72.8km range (and you could probably swap-out the hydraulic for an EM shield rig instead). For HAMs, Javelin all the way. Less damage application than Faction, but you get a really decent 52.4km range (which compares favorably to the unmodified 63.3km Faction RLMLs).

If you opt for RLMLs I wouldn't even bother with a target painter or web. A single TP is a definite must for HAMs though, as this will greatly improve damage application against everything (particularly small targets). A web for HAM Javelins defeats the purpose of clawing back any range loss from switching from RLMLs. Just for kicks I included HAM Rage, but these really only shine against battlecruisers and battleships. You could probably improve this with rigors, flares and some electronic warfare component - but this will greatly weaken your tank and basically place you at point-blank firing range for turrets.


Awesome

I have a lot of skills to level up first but I think your right; looks like Javelin HAM's are the way forward for Caracals now, I can see them being useful defending medium plexes, pity the fittings are so tight I really need near perfect skills to get the best out of them.

and thanks, at least now I know what to train towards Big smile


if you're going in with the intention of using jav hams, you may as well be using hmls instead.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#3060 - 2013-12-10 23:02:58 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Having flown the Guardian an awful lot, I can appreciate the front load mechanic of shields. Those 4.5 seconds for armor reps to kick in feels like an eternity some fights. But this is countered by the fact that the signatures on shield ships are also much higher, so you take more damage - faster. But I think its fair to say that the end of cycle delay for works fine when done right.
So, on the one hand the Thorax will track everything perfectly at almost any range, but the signature of the Moa is more relevant than resistances or front loaded shield boost ?

And a plated Thorax will either be faster than a Moa but a lot less resilient, or a bit less resilient and a bit faster...

And no, the Thorax don't have more dps than the Moa unless you factor drones in. The Thorax can't fit 250mm railguns BTW if he want any kind of tank.

As for the cruisers you took for your tests, they were all attack cruisers with lower signature than combat cruisers and a lot faster to compensate for their lower tank. The only combat cruiser people ever showed here was an AB Rupture. So you see : you just showed that cruisers designed to take reduced damage from missiles do take reduced damage from missiles.

That's what I'm saying for dozens of pages now : using a ship or a module designed to reduce incoming missiles damage is not a good baseline to study missiles damage application. Your numbers are biased.

Yet, diging through numbers and the missile damage formula, I discover something intereting : the missile damage curve over speed is steep, so when the speed start to reduce missile damage, it's quickly a huge reduction. And on the other hand, cruisers have seen their speed increased a lot in the rebalance.

So, looking at numbers, heavy missiles might have fallen a bit too far on the curve.

What puzzle me though with Arthur's numbers is that nobody tryed to analyze the data. Everyone seems happy to see whatever he want to see but nobody explained it whereas this is what is actually interesting and what we can debate on.


I found this graph on the Medium turret thread, Rise himself made it so I'm sure it's not far off being realistic

http://i.imgur.com/E9Dvyqv.png

That's the dps medium turrets can do against a Talwar moving at 1700 m/s at a 60 degree angle, they have 2 tracking enhancers. Just to compare that with a Caracal; against the same target with 2 target painters you can expect to do a steady 34dps using Javelin HAM's out to 45km. If you were to superimpose the HAM damage profile onto the above graph you might see what missile users are talking about, bear in mind Javelin HAM's are the best option we have available for that particular situation as you can see from Arthurs graph above.

(I can't do it myself but if anyone has the knowledge it would just be a horizontal line at 34 on the Y axis going as far as 45 on the x axis and then going directly down to the x axis)

I haven't used any other damage mods because neither did Rise in his example, 2 tracking enhancers vs 2 target painters.

You can see that HAM's are superior to long range turrets in the range from 0-15km, but after that long range turrets are vastly superior all the way out. It's pretty safe to say blasters will be superior for most of the first 10km as well, and light drones from a vexor will eclipse us at all ranges against small fast moving targets.

p.s. we have 2x Warrior II's on the caracal as well and those will further enhance the dps, but the Thorax has 2 full flights of 5.