Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Depends on the MGC/MGE bonus, and whether the Golem's TP bonus will be extended to include the MGC/MGE.

The addition of missile TC/TE will probably mean all current ships relying on rigs for damage application will decrease in effectiveness. Why? To make up for the lack of TC/TE for missiles, CCP has made rigs that affect explosion velocity and explosion radius non-stacking penalized. In order for CCP to introduce midslot/lowslot modules, they will need to change the two stats to be stacking penalized or else certain missile ships will be hilariously overpowered.

Currently, two t2 rigors give a 36% reduction in explosion radius. If they were to be stacking penalized, then they would give a 34% reduction instead.

A T2/PWNAGE TP with Skills V provides a 37.5% bonus. If a sig scripted MCG provides less than that, then you'll use TPs over MCGs until the stacking penalty makes an MCG better.

For example: if a TP provides a 37.5% bonus to target sig and a scripted MCG provides a 30% bonus to missile sig then here is the actual stacking penalized bonus value for each module type:

                    TP       MGC
 1    100.00%    37.50%    30.00%
 2     86.91%    32.59%    26.07%
 3     57.06%    21.40%    17.12%
 4     28.30%    10.61%     8.49%
 5     10.60%     3.97%     3.18%
 6      3.00%     1.12%     0.90%
 7      0.64%     0.24%     0.19%
 8      0.10%     0.04%     0.03%
 9      0.01%     0.00%     0.00%
10      0.00%     0.00%     0.00%

So you would use TP (37.5%), TP (32.59%), MGC (30%), MGC (26.07%), TP (21.4%), MGC (17.12%), TP (10.61%), MGC (8.49%) to maximize your missiles against a target.

The only real variables are whether you are fighting in the TP's falloff and whether you'll need to take advantage of the MGC's range buff.

However, (to actually answer your question) the Golem gets a TP bonus which makes the MGC much less appealing (hence why I would be curious if the Golem also received a buff to MGC,) giving us:

                    TP       MGC
 1    100.00%    56.25%    30.00%
 2     86.91%    48.89%    26.07%
 3     57.06%    32.10%    17.12%
 4     28.30%    15.92%     8.49%
 5     10.60%     5.96%     3.18%
 6      3.00%     1.69%     0.90%
 7      0.64%     0.36%     0.19%
 8      0.10%     0.06%     0.03%
 9      0.01%     0.01%     0.00%
10      0.00%     0.00%     0.00%

So you would use TP (56.25%), TP (48.89%), TP (32.1%), MGC (30%), MGC (26.07%), MGC (17.12%), TP(15.92%), MCG (8.49%).

If you're the kind of person who currently runs a mission Golem with 4+ TPs (and I do,) then the MGC is very useful by allowing us to swap a 15.92% stacking penalized TP with a 30% MGC (and "very useful" == a tad imbalanced.) If you're intimidated by level 4 NPCs and run with 3 TPs or less, then the MGC isn't useful to you. (And it might actually be harmful if Rigor rigors become stacking penalized.)

2 situations I can see where MGC have advantage over TP for golem. Boost Torpedo range, or operate in 120+km range with cruise

2 scripted MGC would push Rage Torp into 70km, assume that Golem also have 2 flight time rig (also if CCP decide to left flight time rig alone with no stack penalty)

Then, for cruise fit Golem can easily reach beyond 200km with fury, 250+ with faction. It is at this point where you said, TP perform poor due to operate in fall off.

however, question is whatever Golem get bonus to MGE/MGC. I somehow doubt it.

Nice, the MGCs weren't up yet on SiSi when I created the thread(it was one of the things that I went looking for when we found the other)

Okay, if we assume a 30% scripted MGC, then a 4TP Golem would go from 356% effective TP to 399% effective TP, which would make it a little easier to pop NPC cruisers with Fury ammo.

More interesting, any non-Golem missile hull that can fit 5 TP/MGCs (362.74% in first column, row 5) would match the effectiveness of the current 4 TP Golem (356.21% in the last column, row 4.) (e.g. Typhoon, Navy Typhoon, Raven, Navy Raven, etc. disregarding any hull bonuses.)

 Cumulative Effect                 Golem Cumulative Effect    
 TP=37.5%  MGC=30%                 TP=56.25%  MGC=30%
 TP+MGC      Just TP    Just MGC   TP+MGC     Just TP
1 137.50%    137.50%    130.00%    156.25%    156.25%
2 182.31%    182.31%    163.90%    232.64%    232.64%
3 237.01%    221.32%    191.95%    307.30%    307.30%
4 298.80%    244.81%    208.24%    399.49%    356.21%
5 362.74%    254.54%    214.87%    503.66%    377.45%
6 424.83%    257.40%    216.80%    589.87%    383.82%
7 469.91%    258.02%    217.22%    683.76%    385.20%
8 509.80%    258.12%    217.28%    741.80%    385.43%

TP+MGC is if you mix the optimal number of TPs and MGCs to minimize stacking penalties.

/spreadsheets, why'd it have to be spreadsheets...?

q.q it's all missiles have

And the paper dps is already weaksauce.

My money is on major range nerfs, than application to the long
range systems and vice versa for short.

Of course this doesn't change the fact there's few ships with slots to use these.

Well Fozzie's MO is such: Hear a bunch of people complaining that a ship is OP because of valid reasons. Nerf the weapon system said ship uses so that said ship is the only one that can really make use of it, and all other ships suffer for it.

References: Drake and medium missiles*, Tengu and medium rails, Ishtar and Sentries, and now Orthrus/Garmur (and to a lesser extent Caracal) and LMLs/RLMLs.

*Not sure if Fozzie did this one actually, and this nerf was so hard that even the Drake no longer uses them effectively.

yea medium rails were pretty powerful. Putting them on a stabber netted you more dps than bonused artillery. Course artillery is not really dps related, but was still amusing, and easier to fit. Plus i heard 250's had close to blaster dps, but way more range.