open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Missile Launchers
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Krendig
Caldari
Posted - 2004.05.05 16:44:00 - [1]
 


I had an off-the-wall idea regarding missile launchers, and their rate of fire.

Currently, nobody uses rockets because, well, they're short range, and to get any kind of RoF, you need the smallest launcher, which holds, what, 3 rockets?

Same with light missles-- You can't get a sustainable RoF of any use out of currently available launchers.

So, the idea is this: Instead of a "fixed" rate of fire, the rate of fire for the launcher becomes the speed at which it can fire a full barrage, ie, the RoF of the particular type of missile is determined by dividing the overall speed of the launcher by the number of missiles that make up a "full load".

For example, currently, a standard missile launcher holds 0.36 m (12 light missiles, 1 cruise missile, 2 heavy missiles, and 36(!) rockets) with a RoF of 14 seconds, regardless of what ammo is loaded.

Instead, what if the launcher could fire "all missiles" in, say (an arbitrary number) 24 seconds? That would be an RoF of 2 seconds for light missiles, 24s for cruise missiles, 12 for heavy missiles, and... uhhh... 0.6 seconds each(!!!) for rockets. Ok, it's not a perfect idea, but it's a start. :) Obviously the launchers should be tuned for their "ideal" ammo, and care needs to be taken that rockets don't suddenly have a RoF of "nearly instant". :)

I haven't spent much, if any time, crunching numbers on this idea, but it struck me as a possible method to make smaller missiles more useful.

Comments?

--Krendig

D3vastator
Caldari
Setenta Corp
Posted - 2004.05.05 17:08:00 - [2]
 

I LOVE IT!!!

This is exactly what is needed. Heck, the only time I use Heavy Missiles is for Mining Defense in 0.6 space & up. It would be very nice to put 5 Heavy Launchers onto my Caracal & Spew rockets. It would make the entire use of rocket/missiles/torpedos much more dynamic. Right now you simply pay attention to price -vs- damage required. Your idea for the formula is very good too. I'm not sure about 24 seconds for Cruise Missiles though. That would make NPC Rat Hunting tougher. But, how many Rockets can you fit into a Siege Launcher? *checking market* 3.0m Capacity / 0.01m volume per rocket means you could put *opens calculator* 300 Rockets in just 1 launcher! Sure, they only do 30 damage each, but 10 of them are equivalent to 1 Cruise missile, although slower with less range.

I really hope that CCP takes notice of this post.

Selak Zorander
Posted - 2004.05.05 19:22:00 - [3]
 

I think this idea has merits and here is what i think krendig is trying to say about rate of fire.

standard launcher fires full load in 24 seconds (to determine speed of each missile divide 24 by number of missiles in a full load)

siege launcher fires full load in 150 seconds (again to determine fire rate of ammunition divide 150 by full load count of missile)

I am not sure the full capacities of the different launchers (have only used standard as I am relatively new to the game) but at those two rates, the standard launcher would fire a rock every 0.6 seconds or almost 2 a second. the siege launcher would fire at exactly 2 rockets a second with that count. I know people dont like to compare things to real life, but two rockets a second is close to the fire rate of the rocket pods used on helicopters in various militaries. They actually might have a faster refire rate than that.

Just my 2 isk. Love it, flame it. its still my opinion

Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
Posted - 2004.05.05 19:39:00 - [4]
 

I'm not sure about a direct relationship, but a modifier would be useful

Bared Bel'Medar
Drunken Wookies
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2004.05.05 19:45:00 - [5]
 

I like it. If that were the case, i'd use rockets on raven for novelty alone!

Gee Man
Minmatar
Holy Knights
Posted - 2004.05.07 03:12:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Gee Man on 07/05/2004 03:13:37
It's pretty keen. I'm thinking in the line of: lighter missiles (less mass/volume) increases RoF of launcher accordingly.

Currently the capacity sizes seem fine, but it really does make sense if smaller missiles can be spat out faster than the bigger ones.

Obviously it's something that would need testing to balance it out, but I think we have the basic idea and it seems more interesting and tactical.

Vel Kyri
Amarr
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
Posted - 2004.05.07 06:43:00 - [7]
 

Brilliant idea.

i would support this 100%

make heavy missiles, light missiles, etc much more useful :)

especially if they would speed those suckers up a huge amount.

Maidel
Amarr
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2004.05.07 12:34:00 - [8]
 

i think maybe if they keep the larger launchers as they are (so u cant have 1000s of rockets comming out of a raven in a few seconds) but make the 'assult launcher' actually and assult launcher - speeding up the rof as suggested - and maybe making a larger assult launcher for cruisers that can fire more light/ rockets at the increased rof

foster
Gallente
Miner Protection Guild
Posted - 2004.05.07 14:31:00 - [9]
 

i like this idea alot. at the end of the day you would be able to fire and reload a small/light rocket alot faster than a big/heavy torpedo.

Bi Tor
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2004.05.08 05:39:00 - [10]
 

I also like this idea. The RoF would have to be tuned so as to include the reload time.

I think it would improve the use of Defender missiles. I hate it when i run out in the middle of an ingagement or the enemy missiles are coming in so fast that i can't get half of them.

Anjelle
Caldari
Freelancer Union
Posted - 2004.05.08 08:30:00 - [11]
 

I totally agree, this is one of the best ideas I've heard for a long time. Rockets really are sort of crappy having so little damage and so little range, but if one could fire them that fast they might actually be useful for an orbiting interceptor or something similar, or you could make some crazy siege combinations with what would feel like never ending rocket bombardements =). Anyway great idea man!

Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
Cruel Intentions
Posted - 2004.05.08 13:00:00 - [12]
 

Hm.. yes, and the different launchers need a tuning of fitting requirements after this.

The reload time should remain the same, but the different launchers would have an activation time which is variable depending on the missile/rocket type.
At the same time, something has to be done so that the Siege Launcher doesn't end up being the be-all-end-all of launchers. See how a close range Megathron has difficulties ending interceptors at close range and compare to how a Raven would do against the same if the Raven use Rockets in Siege Launchers.

Rocket Launcher should, in my oppinion, remain the best launcher for rockets.

Bi Tor
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2004.05.08 15:53:00 - [13]
 

I have taken a look at this and noticed the following.

1. The damage inflicted by a missile is relative to its size. Therefore if you filled a siege luancher with rockets it would do more damage tham the same one filled with torpedoes. The rockets fill more of the space available.

2. Trops and cruise missiles would still dominate the battleship becuase they have a longer range and higher speeds. Could you see a Megathron closing to 20km to fire a barrage of rockets?

3. The big advantage would be in the fact that the overload of rockets would defete most defensive systems. Fit a Caracal with 5 hvy. luanchers; 3torp, 1standard and 1 defender. The std missile would confuse the targets defenders and the target would need to be very sharp to pick out the torps inorder to kill them with smart bombs.

Danton Marcellus
Nebula Rasa Holdings
Posted - 2004.05.08 17:03:00 - [14]
 

I've said it before, rockets getting increased RoF so that you can perform area cover barrages against incoming missile & drones.

Telnen Kahfir
Gallente
Triple Crystal Miners
Posted - 2004.05.08 17:15:00 - [15]
 

Edited by: Telnen Kahfir on 08/05/2004 17:16:54
I'm not a very heavy missile launcher user in general (just bought the skill a few days ago, in fact), but I wholeheartedly approve of this idea.

And to counter your second point, Bi Tor, there's nothing to stop a battleship from pounding the crap out of at least a cruiser. I agree that frigates, especially with MWDs can easily avoid anything the bship throws at them, but I don't think thats inconsistent with the combat roles that CCP has been moving towards. Frigates are a nuisance to a battleship, and one that may require the assistance of a cruiser or frigate escort to deal with. The same applies in the rocket/missile argument.

[edited to fix which point I was countering. Second, not third.]

DHU InMe
Gallente
Corsairs Inc.
The Spire Collective
Posted - 2004.05.08 18:06:00 - [16]
 

It all depend of the bonus of RoF it can give to rocket.

If must be equivalent to hybride/projectile/energy damage/range.

They tweaked the hybride, missile could be tweaked in rof also !

Churchyard
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2004.05.08 19:32:00 - [17]
 

Its a good idea, but persomaly I like this one better Very Happy

Imo there should only be 3 different kind of launchers, one for eatch ship class. There should be extra equipment (racks) that modifies the launcher to hold different classes of missiles, kinda like crystals for lasers.

Eatch kind of rack have RoF and capacity according to the missiles it carries. For example a frig class rocket rack would have very hig RoF and a high capacity (Highest damage potential as its a close range weapon) The frig class torpedo rack should only carry 1 torp and have a long reaload time.

Example for launchers and rakcs:

Frigate Class Launcher: Can be fitted with Rocket rack, light missile rack and torpedo rack.

Cruiser Class Launcher: Can be fitted with all kind of racks.

Bs Class Launcher: Can be fitted with Cruise missile and torpedo racks


or something like that... I really hate the way it works now. Any changes to the current system would be good imo Laughing









Neko Makai
Minmatar
Black Lance
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2004.05.09 05:05:00 - [18]
 

How bout the more missiles you load in a launcher, the longer it will take to reload. This could prevent lotta rocket spam just cuz u can reloaD EM all in several seconds. This could be sorta like a charge skill in a way. Ie. Raven loads ship with 300 rockets on a siege launcher. In the station there is no time so its easy. On the battle field it MWD in real close to shoot a devistating volley of rockets onto a BS thus reducing it to scrap metal. After volly it is leaft helpless with its very long reloading of rockets and must withdrawl... but of course it already left the BS with little or no armor, or dead so its friend can finish it off. Well something along those line, i know it needs working but its just a brainstorm...

Gardarsdottir
Caldari
SeXy CoRnEr
Posted - 2004.05.09 11:12:00 - [19]
 

I love this Idea.

Rockets and light missiles are of no use now, they should be very useful if they would Change it :)

Seska Fuzen
Posted - 2004.05.09 15:04:00 - [20]
 

I like this, too bad the navitas don't have any launchers, here's hoping for an elite navitas with a launcher so I can use rocket launchers with thsi great idea :)

Bi Tor
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2004.05.09 17:27:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Churchyard

Imo there should only be 3 different kind of launchers, one for eatch ship class. There should be extra equipment (racks) that modifies the launcher to hold different classes of missiles, kinda like crystals for lasers.



I like the basic idea here, one type of rack for each class of ship, or more likely 3-4 launchers that are tuned for the different ship sizes. This is sort of what they have now.

However the rack thing would not work in the current game structure, you would be loading a rack that is loaded into a launcher. All the other weapons in the game have a single load depth. (As a programmer I have an idea as to why they restrict container in container actions.)

I will point out that the different missile types are the "tuning crystals" for the missile launcher.

Originally by: Churchyard

Eatch kind of rack have RoF and capacity according to the missiles it carries. For example a frig class rocket rack would have very hig RoF and a high capacity (Highest damage potential as its a close range weapon) The frig class torpedo rack should only carry 1 torp and have a long reaload time.



If you based Rate of Fire upon the size of the missile being launched you would get an intrinsic RoF increase for the smaller missiles.

If you then increased the time to reload the launcher into the 30 sec to 1 minute area and base this number upon the volume of the launcher, it would be very realistic and would give the smaller missile types the boost they need to become usefull. It would also allow for the development of different volume launcher for the different classes of ship.

Originally by: Churchyard

Example for launchers and rakcs:

Frigate Class Launcher: Can be fitted with Rocket rack, light missile rack and torpedo rack.

Cruiser Class Launcher: Can be fitted with all kind of racks.

Bs Class Launcher: Can be fitted with Cruise missile and torpedo racks



The volume of the launchers would be the item use for tuning which ships would carry which missile and how many would be carried. Ie. a vol. .90 launcher would hold 1 torp., 3 cruise, 6 heavy, and I don't know how many standard and rocketsEmbarassed as I do NOT use these useless missile.Razz However a 3.0 vol. launcher could carry 5 torps., 10 cruise, etc., but should take alot long to reload due to the number of missile it must move from the cargo hold to the launchers internal storage rack.

I do not believe that the different classes of ships should be restricted as to their weapons load, I believe that the users will do the restricting as they find the most effective combinations.

Originally by: Churchyard

or something like that... I really hate the way it works now. Any changes to the current system would be good imo Laughing



Yes, I agree that the system could use a rework as some of the basic weapons are being ignored by the players.

Yes, these ideas would make the smaller ship clases more effective against the larger ship classes. But I think it would lead to the diversifing of a combat unit, instead of every one appearing in a battleship.

Yes, I would sacrifice speed and range for RoF and saturation effects, but then I am a Frigate Interceptor[FI] pilot at heart.

Telnen Kahfir
Gallente
Triple Crystal Miners
Posted - 2004.05.12 00:07:00 - [22]
 

This remains one of the best ideas I've seen in the Idea Lab.

*bump*


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only