You try to compare long range orthus with the close range fit thorax. Got webbed - deserved to die. Close range is always more dps, for a good reason.

I'm actually impressed by how bad these changes are. It isn't a good sign when your playerbase can't tell if an idea is legitimate or an april fools joke.

How do the RLML nerfs address the core problem of the weapon system? They are overpowered because they can kill most cruisers in a single clip while still being able to nuke frigates as per their intended role. This change makes ships with the defined role of anti-tackle useless by forcing them to use unbonused RLML range and missile velocity. Without the velocity bonus on the Orthrus for example, it can't apply half of its' current damage to an interceptor post-patch. But it CAN still 100-0 most t1 cruisers in a single clip.

The clear solution to this would be to simply leave the hull bonuses (ironically enough the mordu line was introduced to be proficient at using rapid missile systems because of the role bonus) but reduce the clip size of RLML and RHML launchers significantly. Just as tackle frigates can play around the tracking of turret-based anti-tackle, they will be able to play around the reload of an RLML ship if it could only fire 12-15 missiles per clip. They could also use an increase in fitting requirements since they are too low compared to other launcher types of the same size. This fixes the core problem of RLML without simply half-assing a braindead fix and just making the weapons system completely useless.

But hey HMLs get 5.6% increased damage, that changes everything!

I read most of this thread but Suitonia really crushed it out of the park with this one. The grid really is a big issue because the reason you see so many Caracals being used is because they get great application and a really heavy tank compared with any other ship in the attack cruiser line and a lot of that has to do with the fact that a T2 rapid light launcher uses only 77 grid. The two with the next least grid usage among cruiser weapons are:

Dual 180mm Auctocannon II: 88 grid
Quad Light Beam Laser II: 89 grid

Consider that these other two low grid users frequently under perform and so are rarely used especially the quad laser and yet both will take more out of your fit than rapid lights. Consider increasing the grid usage on rapid lights to the 90 - 100 grid range please and this is completely irrespective of other changes (even focused medium pulse laser IIs take 125 grid). Sure, the ships that fit rapid lights tend to have less grid on average but not 40% less than average. How often do you see 180 autocannons or electron blasters being used without multiple reps or oversized ASBs? Ships fitting rapid lights sacrifice nothing in their fits because the fittings are so low on them. The point is that when fitting other weapon types to save on grid your downgraded weapons IS the sacrifice, for rapid lights this is not the case as they are the preferred weapon anyway.

On another note, I like that you are at least looking at HMLs but their problem isn't really their damage it's the very poor application they get against small fast ships, which let's be honest, is going to be a situation that comes up often in pvp. Part of the reason people lean to rapid lights in the first place is that unlike HMLs or HAMs damage application is a non-issue. In the case of kiting fits especially crash boosters are not really going to be an option for HMLs because rolling that speed penalty is a really big deal, so don't expect those fits to swap over to heavies with these proposed changes, they'll either stay rapid lights or change ships. Missiles are not like turrets where you can at least try to fly in a way that will drop transversal and allow you to land hits on small ships. I'd even accept a small nerf to the damage of HMLs if it meant they could get mediocre damage application to small fast ships.