That graph is misleading. It specifies all the different missiles types but on the other hand piles all the other weapon systems in one group. OF COURSE that is going to show heavy missiles (or any other missile type) are under used. If they would break up "hybrids" into "light blasters, light rails, medium blaster, medium rails" etc etc then that would create a different picture. Or, conversely, pile all the missile types onto one and then see how that works out.

Not saying it would suddenly sway it the other way but this is just a silly and misleading representation.

[GÇô]CCP_QuantCCP[S] 6 points 2 hours ago
I wondered the same, I grouped by the group name of the typeID and it seems this is how it is in the database. I thought about grouping them manually but CCP_Cognac said no :) blame him

From Reddit.

You realise it's split by ship, or are you telling me undersized guns is a thing?

It's specifying missiles from rockets all the way to citadels. So while it's perhaps useful to figure how the different missiles types are represented it's misleading (to the average viewer anyway) in total representation.

But we can work around that. Adding up all the missile damages based on the values of the color coding and lumping them together as Missile Damage shows
1) Drones
2) Hybrids
3) Projectile
4) Laser
5) Missiles.

With the vast majority of all missile damage coming from a single source. SB Torps.

About the only misleading thing is Drones, because nearly every hull cruiser and up has a drone bay.

Sure, that makes sense but given the rather course legend and visualisation it's not really that easy. again, not saying that this would completely change the graph (it wouldn't, missiles are underused in lol blob fleets) but in and of itself it's misleading. Still, just because current blob inbred fleet meta doesn't use missiles doesn't mean they're inherently bad.

Agreed but I think that's fairly unlikely given the resist nerf, HP nerf and the loss of a launcher. They don't need more range either (IMO). I genuinely don't see it being a danger of a return to 2011

And if I'm wrong my preference is to fix missiles and nerfbat the drake - too many hulls have been left outside in the cold because of it (well today it's because of fear of its legacy).

Yes it does mean they are inherently bad if they weren't than the inbred blob fleets as you call them would be using them more..

No, blob fleet doctrines are about counters. Just because something doesn't counter the current top dog doesn't mean it's bad, it's just not the most obvious counter at that moment.

I dislike the idea, more damage over time doesn't make sense or sit well with me. I think it would be greatly abused if it did.

While it helps snipers, things like the barghest would be super powerful, it seems kiting tengus would be way more powerful than they are.

Because it has too much range while not having range related performance gaps.

No it hasn't, there are no performance gaps based on range and as such it's versatile which is a plus, so it needs a con to make up for it. you want HML to do more dps or apply more damage? Then it needs to have its base range slashed, could be made up for by morphing precision missiles into range ones to help it achieve more range but base 60km without range performance issues is very good.

Ok humor me what range performance gaps are you talking about.

Isnt that the line that's over the missile line from 10-lock range?

Yup, sure sucks.

You know you can change ammo, right? That ships dont teleport from 70km to 30km? That the shooter can move?

Just a troll at this point I think.

Agreed. Although, we could just be biased...

12% lower explosion radius would give you what 97m?