I think giving them the dps of larger short range missiles is a bad idea. Torpedoes, for one, have tremendous DPS. I think they should do more like heavy missile and cruise missile DPS. Otherwise people will fly them in large gangs and obliterate the competition quickly before they have to reload again. After all, why fit your Raven with torpedoes that go 25km when you can fit heavy missiles with the same burst DPS and a range of 70km? With enough friends, you don't need to worry about the long load time.

Torpedo Ravens and HAM Caracals should do significantly more DPS than RHML Ravens or RLML Caracals.

Seems we are at the mercy of these anonymous "games testers" because there's no way we can dispute test results if we don't have access to the data or even what these tests comprised of. Does anyone know if they are CCP employees or just random dudes Rise picked up on the forums, or recruited from the federal defense union?

Seems we are at the mercy of these anonymous "games testers" because there's no way we can dispute test results if we don't have access to the data or even what these tests comprised of. Does anyone know if they are CCP employees or just random dudes Rise picked up on the forums, or recruited from the federal defense union?

I think giving them the dps of larger short range missiles is a bad idea. Torpedoes, for one, have tremendous DPS. I think they should do more like heavy missile and cruise missile DPS. Otherwise people will fly them in large gangs and obliterate the competition quickly before they have to reload again. After all, why fit your Raven with torpedoes that go 25km when you can fit heavy missiles with the same burst DPS and a range of 70km? With enough friends, you don't need to worry about the long load time.

Torpedo Ravens and HAM Caracals should do significantly more DPS than RHML Ravens or RLML Caracals.

Dear CCP Seagull,

I was very disappointed with CCP Rise's balancing of the Rapid Missile Launchers. As such, I went back to my calculations from the HML and CML balance discussions. In the process, I determined that the biggest issue with the Turrets and Missiles being balanced is the damage equation. Now, as a note in backgrond, I am a mechanical engineer by training and have a good understanding of mathmatics.

Under the present system, missile damage delivered is based on the quotient of Sig-Radius-Target/Explosion-radius and the Target-Velocity/Explosion-Velocity. Now, from what I understand this is supposed to mimic the tracking and optimal range aspects of turrets. I applaud the game designer that thought of this initially, as it is a good idea. However, it isn't the best idea, personal opinion, nor the most accurate.

In reality, missiles do not detonate in spherical explosions. In fact, the detonations are more like a cone-shaped blast like from a shotgun. Now, that would be the same for in space but with more range and velocity due to the lack of friction in space. It is these two quotients that are causing the problems between the parity of turrets and missiles as well as between the missiles themselves.

It would be more optimal to make the equations for damage more comparable. Since missiles technically explode in a cone-shaped blast, it would be logical to make use of that. The damage would be reduced as one moves farther away from the point of detonation within that cone. Similar to the dynamics of a blast from a shotgun if you are familiar with that. As such, a optimal-falloff similar system would make sense. In short, the closer the target is to the missile at detonation the more damage it should deal.

To imitate the other aspect of the missile detonation, is trickier. At present, I am thinking that some kind of tracking-resolution for the missile is the best way. IR missiles ability to apply damage is based on their speed and interception of the target. The previous paragraph addresses the later aspect. The missile speeds need to be more amenable to that fact we are talking a space-age tech. However, it would be the missiles ability to track that would affect its ability to hit. A missile with a finer tracking sensor should hit better than one with a less fine tracking sensor. Logically, the tracking sensor would be best tuned for its intended size of target: frig, cruiser, battleship etc.

To summarize my proposal to you is this:

Missiles could to be fixed in the following manner:
1) Explosion velocity needs to be replaced with a optimal and falloff rating on the missile. The reason is to represent the intensity of the blast with respect to distance from the missile.
2) Explosion Radius, needs to be replaced with a scan-resolution value for the missile. This will still simulate the increased difficulty of missiles tracking an under-sized target. (HMs @ Frigs/Dessies).
*Using the above changes would not need an adjustment to missile speeds.

Alternatively:
1) Explosion velocity is replaced with a comparison of Target-velocity and raw missile-velocity. This would simulate the missile's ability to intercept the target.
2) Explosion radius is replaced with scan-resoluton value. Same as the other suggestion.
*Would likely result in a need to adjust missile speeds to bring into parity with Turrets for intended use.

The other point that I would like to bring up with you sir, is the versatility. Logically, missiles by their design should be the most flexibile of all the systems. In addition, missiles shouldn't be short of alpha-damage capability. Their drawback should be the sophistication needed by their launchers. This should mean that missiles auto-track to the next target similar to real-life ones. Possibly with the potential of having a blank missile with load-able warheads to change missile damage or other characteristics. This would require a pilot to try and anticipate what challenges he would face and how to deal with them.

A similar switch out system could also be used with drones...which would bring that system also more in-line with the others.

Best regards,
~Kenshi

ps. Please forgive any errors in spelling or grammar, as it is quite late for me. If you have any questions or comments I would like to hear them.

This is the mail I just sent to CCP Seagull. What we need to do is just go over this ignorant dev's head. Any feedback? I was interested in the mechanics of drones and missiles to be changed to a more streamlined and less inefficient system.

FYI, I wrote that evemail at around 2 AM my time. So there might be some grammar or spelling errors in there.

The RLML caracal is going to be massively better than the HML variant under the new system.

So i tried to exclusively spend some time with the new RLMLs...and i have to say they are just as problematic as predicted. The "new tactical possibilities" Rise advertised pretty much are: Try to gank a T1 frig, then warp off. And at that they are actually pretty good. So i actually got quite a lot of kills with them.

Any prolonged engagement is prohibited by not being able to switch ammunition types. Bouncing around system for reloads or ammoswitches is a risky thing to do considering the new warpmechanics. Your main option to react to a changing battlefield is...to warp off. The lack of flexibility actually prevents you from engaging in a lot of fights which could have delivered some interesting experiences. At one point i got so bored that i actually found myself sitting at a gate in FW space ganking T1 frigs and dessies with a sebo-¦d Caracal while pulling gate gun aggro. Then i warped off. As soon as something got onto me which didnt fit my damage type i warped of. Killing T1 fasttackle works nicely, then...you have to warp off...or sit there for 40 second staring at your next target if there is nothing which can actually catch you and hope that you can break their tank with the next magazine...i mean you could always warp off, right? Your target sports a decent active tank? Better warp off. I think you can see where im going with this. I am sorry but i really couldn-¦t find any use for these things besides ganking single targets or to kill single frig/dessi size targets in what could have been interesting engagements. I put my efforts on hold to field RLMLs and just went back to turret boats. Oh look, suddenly my FLEXIBILITY gives me far more TACTICAL OPTIONS.

Haven-¦t really tested them in a fleet environment yet but i guess it-¦s not a nice thing to know that in a decent fight -which is not just a gank- half of your fleet is just sitting there doing nothing.

I tested the RHML on the testserver. And tbh they work quite nicely against single targets, even against hacs. But better make sure your targets are alone. Otherwise you are dead. Tactical options everywhere. If you aren-¦t sure that your target is 100% solo, don-¦t bother using them. All you want to do with these things is to gank stuff, then warp off..or MJD, then warp off. RR on field? Warp off. Fighting decent active tanks? Warp off. Warp off. warp off, warp off.

You can actually kill stuff with these things quite competently. The problem is that a formerly decently balanced weapon system is forced into a niche role with very limited uses. At least in their current state. And that niche is one of the most boring and mindnumbing ones on top of that: Gank targets smaller than yourself. Tinkering with the reload times and magazine sizes might deal with this issue to a certain extent. I for one won-¦t bother with both these weapon systems any more until they are fixed. There are just so many more viable options out there.

I don't think we need to overthink things with comparison to real world physics. It is not their model per se that is the problem with missiles it's the numbers to each of the parameters.

The problems are the organization of the tiers, the magazine/reload times and the ranges of the various types:

Rockets: Nothing to add here.

LML are the small ship launcher, probably best to leave them alone at the moment. If someone said they need a range nerf it would be hard to argue.

RLML reload time is unacceptable game play. Reload time needs to come down to 20 secs MAX. Simply adjust ROF and magazines to put dps where you want it. That gives you your "tension" but doesn't mean you will always seek to abandon the field to reload. One cruiser specifically designed as a frig killer should be able to battle toe to toe with an AF or kill 2 T1 Frigs before being driven off the field to reload. I'm ok with the PG increases in exchange for more gank. If you train Cruiser V and have an appropriately rigged ship (ie T2 fitting) then you should have no trouble with an AF, imho, the training for which is comparatively weeks shorter.

The real problem here is that there is only one option now for a cruiser and light missiles. Bring back the old launchers and nerf their range/dps if need be. Let the players decide which play style they prefer. People will welcome more ganky burst for some fights, but will prefer the older style for others. The older launchers should have lower PG for better tank (ie the same as before Rubicon).

HAMS are ridiculous in that the long range version (Javelin) has the smaller explosion radius and lesser damage (not complaining here) for an anti-frig weapon but Heavy Missiles have the long range version do more damage and the short rage (Precision) do less with a better applied damage.

This is illogical and arbitrary. Shorter range should carry more payload for both types. HM game play would benefit from an ability to snipe frigs then have to move in a little closer to use the real dps dealers. Instead, with heavies you have to risk brawling the frigs and then lose your range advantage. Illogical and arbitrary.

HML dps is pathetic. It doesn't have to be HAM dps but needs a buff. Given the large explosion radius this is only of consequence for BC and BS which are hardly dropping like flies to HML.

RHMLs again need a reload time adjusted to 20 seconds MAX with dps and total damage set appropriately after consideration of the above fact that standard heavies do pathetic dps. A RHML BS should be able to go toe to toe with any single Cruiser/HAC/Heavy Cruiser and not be twiddling his thumbs waiting for a reload after they tank his initial burst. I am not saying he needs to blow them away in one magazine, but he should be hitting them again before next week.

40 seconds is unprecedented in gaming to wait for your primary dps to come off of cooldown.

This is not gameplay that will find favor with many. 20 seconds is an eternity, let alone 40...

Cruises/Torps nothing to add at this time for pvp other than the "flight times" of all missiles sux. No fun for everything to be blown up before my missiles get there in a gang.

Anyways, 2 Iskies worth of input....None of this requires any fancy coding. Simple base number substitutions.



/flame on

ps don't get me started on 40 secs for a reload of ammo type...this needs to go bye bye fast.

For a weapon system mounted on a larger hull having a smaller clip size is kind of silly. The firing rate of a missile launcher has *nothing* to do with the barrels. You could technically deploy your entire magazine in one volley, and I think that should be an option.

Obviously expending 18/23 charges in a couple of seconds sounds hilariously OP, until you're out of ammo. And even then there's no guarantee of a kill since your total volley damage is still only 28k~~ for RLML and and some 40k for RHML.. which may get speed tanked down.

Just a thought.

I still want to know exactly whom thought this was a good idea.
Everyone I've heard talk about it hates the reload and is busy trying to sell hulls.

Scroll back to some of the earliest posts. There's a short list...

For a weapon system mounted on a larger hull having a smaller clip size is kind of silly. The firing rate of a missile launcher has *nothing* to do with the barrels. You could technically deploy your entire magazine in one volley, and I think that should be an option.

Obviously expending 18/23 charges in a couple of seconds sounds hilariously OP, until you're out of ammo. And even then there's no guarantee of a kill since your total volley damage is still only 28k~~ for RLML and and some 40k for RHML.. which may get speed tanked down.

Just a thought.

I kinda like that idea. Press F1, every single missile loaded fires at the same time and then you go into a long reload.

...While you warp out.

Caracal with 2 ordinary light missile launchers and 3 HAMs, it does 289dps with Javelin to 45km, or 382 dps within 25km with Rage HAM's. 40k EHP buffer tank, 190ehps shield regen, but no prop mod and no tackle lol

How much does it change if you swap-out the light missile launchers for rapid light launchers? I'm thinking that the key to utilizing the new RLMLs is not as a primary weapon system, but a supplementary one.

How much does it change if you swap-out the light missile launchers for rapid light launchers? I'm thinking that the key to utilizing the new RLMLs is not as a primary weapon system, but a supplementary one.

Does anyone have the market data for these since the Rubicon release?

Just wondering if the price plummeted. I'm at work or I'd check myself.