In light of CCP's recent changes, it would make sense to turn Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration into a dedicated missile subsystem.

Current effects:
7.5% bonus to medium projectile turret rate of fire per level
7.5% bonus to missile launcher rate of fire per level

Dedicated missile effects: (much like Tengu's Accelerated Ejection Bay)
5% bonus to Explosive Missile Damage per level
7.5% bonus to Heavy, Heavy Assault and Rapid Light missile launcher rate of fire per level
7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness


NOTE:
Don't hate about the bonuses, support the idea of HAM Lokis and let CCP do their thing.

The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.

40 is not quite as weird as the 100mbit bandwidth that some ships have, I mean seriously, there is no possible configuration of 5 drones that can use all that.

No, but there is a possible combination of 4 drones that can use all of it. Why are people so completely obsessed with having to field five drones?

When the Stratios was nerfed, half the complaints weren't about the drop in DPS, they were about not having magical five drones and only having crappy trash four. I don't get it.

Keep in mind guys, this is a thread about a Loki HAM subsystem. Please don't wander off topic.

Tech3s are due for a change, and are not meant to go above Tech2 in terms of raw performance (example: Warfare Subsystems, have a look why at the end of this blog). The other problem with Tech3s is that only a few of the sub-system configurations are actually decent, with the rest being quite terrible. Ideally all the sub-systems should have a proper role on the field, and Tech3 should be used because of their flexibility and adaptability, not because they surpass hulls of the same category at their specialized purpose.

The chart linked in the first post is slightly out-of-date - the new one we've showed during Fanfest 2013 is here.

In summary:

• Tech1 are the basic entry level, simple gameplay hulls that are used as reference points for all the other. That's why we started with them during the "tiericide" initiative.
• Navy / Faction are improvement over Tech1, with roles more or less varied depending on the ships themselves. Ex: Drake vs Drake Navy Issue, Megathron vs Vindicator and so on.
• Tech2 hulls provide specialized gameplay with advanced mechanics. Perfect example are Stealth Bombers, Interdictors, Heavy Interdictors, or Black Ops.
• Tech3 vessels were initially meant to be extremely flexible with adaptable roles due to sub-system configurations. In practice, they currently overlap in stats with other, more specialized ship classes, which create problems.

Tech3 ships are due to be rebalanced after Tech2 hulls so that our team may use the experience they've gained along the way to overhaul them properly.


Exactly how and when this is going to be accomplished, we cannot say for now, even if we do have some ideas.

back on topic: T3 rebalance is still coming, these haven't been rebalanced with the new ship design policies in mind, this is something you'll probably have to just be patient on till summer expansion.

There's no Summer expansion, only 4 updates and another Winter expansion in late 2014.

they currently overlap in stats with other, more specialized ship classes, which create problems.

whats so unclear on this that you still suggest to balance this subsystem by using a faction cruiser as pattern?

The subsystem would be fine (very good, even) if they gave it the Scythe Fleet Issue treatment - which is exactly what should be done. A full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles, plus that weird 40mbit drone bandwidth.

If you try to make it a dedicated missile subsystem, all you do is create a faster Tengu. Better to give it 2nd-Generation Minmatar Split WeaponsGäó and make it properly versatile - and properly viable - like it was intended to be.

If I had any idea which CSM cares even a little about the T3 rebalance (other than simply seeing them nerfed into the ground) I would say to them "Hey, if the topic of T3 balancing comes up, perhaps you can suggest this to them."

why give a sub that can be used with either guns or missiles since you already have 2 other for projectiles ....just give him the damn ham ss and be done with it :')

It's a great racial feature that shouldn't be lost just because there are people who want a Tengu without the stigma of saying they fly a Tengu.

Or for people that want a Matari styled missile boat (look at Minmatar's missile ships' bonuses, they're different).

Because it is one of exactly two subsystems on the Loki that can be used with any drones, meaning you can use it to clear things that get under your artillery. Also because the Accelerated Ejection Bay is better at missiles than this proposed version would be, so what's the point? Nobody will use it for HAMs without a velocity bonus and giving it one would just make it an explosion-damage copy of the Tengu's subsystem.

Some of us actually like the Matari flair for ships that can be given neutral (ie non-weapon) rigs, fitted to fly missiles, then docked and immediately refitted to fly artillery (or autocannons). It's a great racial feature that shouldn't be lost just because there are people who want a Tengu without the stigma of saying they fly a Tengu.

new claymore gets double RoF bonus' and explosion velocity bonus. It's pretty rediculous. So not all minmatar missile boats are Dmg bonused.

I agree to the suggested changes though, the projectile bonus on that subystem seems worthless, seeing as how all the other subsystems affect projectile, why would I choose one that only gives 1 bonus with 4 hardpoints? Always seemed wasted to me. I'd like to see the dmg bonus or dmg/explosion velocity bonus would be awesome.

or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved.

or leave bonuses as is and add 5th hardpoint for both weapon systems - problem solved.

you have a funny way of solving problems :')

5 turrets/launchers with 7.5% RoF bonus per level translate into 8 effective turrets or launchers which is rather balanced (and in line with other offensive subs) when compared to 12(10 in pvp/wh variant) effective launchers + projection bonus on Tengu with acceleration ejection bay. Drone bandwidth could be reduced to 25 tho.

we are not here to debate if other subs are balanced compared to this one but how could we balance this one to be on par with the others : loki need an assault optimisation or something similar

I can't agree, removing split weapon systems from Minmatar is a very bad idea, making Cyclone/Claymore/Typhoon into pure' missile ships was also a very bad idea, we need more complex flavour in the ships and less homogenization into strict guns or missiles setups.

I suggest something in the lines of:

...

In any case the bonuses need to be appropriate to reflect the needs to become useful rather than just display theoretical maximum damage output and then fail in any kind of practical application.

Minmatar needs more viable split weapon ships, not 'pure' missile ships.

You should look up "Projectile Scooping Array" and "Turret Concurrence Registry" subsystems. What Loki currently lacks is a proper missile sub (or a split v2 weapon system offensive subsystem, like scythe fleet issue has).

and dont forget to redesign teh capacitor rewgenaration matrix looks because its ******* digusting....

... his version would be hilariously overpowered.

Debating if other subsystems are balanced compared to this one and debating how we could balance this one to be on par with the others are kind of the same thing, aren't they? At the very least, they both serve the same purpose.

Anyway, the whole problem with the subsystem is that it forces you to fit a Loki with both turrets and missiles. If you were able to fit a full rack of guns or a full rack of missiles (pilot's choice, naturally) then this subsystem would be completely fine.

Just a thought: current split weapon Loki sub might bring a lot of fun in prospect of changed mechanics for RLMs. Have 3 or 4 artis do their job and 4-3 rapids for burst damage every now and then.

This isn't the loki fleet issue subsystem. Stop comparing to scyFI. No other t3 has a split subsystem that I'm aware of. Give the loki a dedicated sub. 1 missile bonus sub is lame when every other subsystem gives 2 sometimes 3 bonuses to their weapon class. I like the rof and explosion velocity bonus. Simple and effective.

This isn't the loki fleet issue subsystem. Stop comparing to scyFI. No other t3 has a split subsystem that I'm aware of. Give the loki a dedicated sub. 1 missile bonus sub is lame when every other subsystem gives 2 sometimes 3 bonuses to their weapon class. I like the rof and explosion velocity bonus. Simple and effective.

Please elaborate.

No other race uses split weapon bonuses on their other ships, either. Minmatar does. Your argument is invalid.

EDIT: Technically, the Legion's "Drone Synthesis Projector" counts as a split weapons system, giving a bonus to drones and a bonus to lasers. The Proteus also has a "Drone Synthesis Projector" that gives a damage bonus to hybrids and bonuses to drones.

...
Your version, while not bad at all, gives the subsystem two full sets of bonuses. Look at the other ships with Split v2 bonuses and you'll see that they don't get nearly the same amount of power as you're proposing to give them.

In light of CCP's recent changes, it would make sense to turn Hardpoint Efficiency Configuration into a dedicated missile subsystem.

Current effects:
7.5% bonus to medium projectile turret rate of fire per level
7.5% bonus to missile launcher rate of fire per level

Dedicated missile effects: (much like Tengu's Accelerated Ejection Bay)
5% bonus to Explosive Missile Damage per level
7.5% bonus to Heavy, Heavy Assault and Rapid Light missile launcher rate of fire per level
7.5% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness


NOTE:
Don't hate about the bonuses, support the idea of HAM Lokis and let CCP do their thing.