Missiles

[Thorgrim]

Thought this should have a thread of its own.

I think its time for some tweaking here.

My suggestion for LRM is to bring down the heat for LRM9 from 17 to 15 and for LRM 12 from 24 to 20. This will be more in line with the other missiles. Now what can we do for the bigger racks without touching weight/slots/ammo ? How about range. SRM8 can get range 10. LRM6 can go down to 22 with 23 for LRM9 and 24 with LRM12 ? GMH sould stay and NM14 can be pushed to 11 ?


Hmm, different ranges for same type of missiles is a little hard to swallow IMO. Though it would make bigger racks slightly more appealing, it goes against common sense.
The key is recycle time IMO. With 2 LRM6s you can deal the same amount of damage than with 1 LRM12, and they'll recycle in ~half the time, effectively doubling your damage/sec potential. For other types, smaller racks recycle in ~2/3 the bigger racks, which is 150% dam/sec.

[LarkinVB]

I know. But I can't reduce recycling time for bigger racks as it will unbalance other weapons. LRM12 at 15 secs will outclass AC20 by far. What I can do is to increase recycle time for the smaller racks to be the same as the LRM12. But a LRM6 at 27 secs isn't very attractive. Different ranges can be explained with slightly stronger rockets carrying the same explosive warhead.

[Thorgrim]

Also notice that if I'm playing a Devastator for example, I'll WANT to go to range 22, so I can use all racks. At that range LRM12s get a 4% increase in to hit, LRM9s 2%. Not very significant.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: LarkinVB
I know. But I can't reduce recycling time for bigger racks as it will unbalance other weapons. LRM12 at 15 secs will outclass AC20 by far. What I can do is to increase recycle time for the smaller racks to be the same as the LRM12. But a LRM6 at 27 secs isn't very attractive.

A middle ground value, maybe with a couple of secs difference for each rack size?
It's not just LRMs.

Different ranges can be explained with slightly stronger rockets carrying the same explosive warhead.

One ammo slot holds the same # of rockets (not reloads) for any rack independent of size [:D] (except for the LRM9, which is a fluke). This happens in every missile type. Stronger rockets should be bigger, and create more heat.

[aquietfrog]

I think one other slight advantage a larger rack has is its ability to fire more missiles at a given heat level. Fore example, at heat level 49.0 C, an SRM8 could fire without heat penalty, two SRM4s however fire one rack at 49.0 C and another at heat level 54.0, giving the second rack a penalty of -5%. This is almost insignificant due to the low heat generation of SRMs, though.

I go with the suggestion of smaller recycle time gaps. Perhaps the larger rack would be 2 seconds slower plus more heat to offset the said advantage.

smaller racks would be:
advantage: faster recycle times meaning better damage/per second
disadvantage: ammo slot inefficiency.

larger racks would be:
advantage: heat penalty avoidance, better ammo slot efficiency
disavantage: slower recycle times and more heat.

the larger heat generation could be explained by thinking of each rack having an individual heat sink. smaller racks would be like multiple recons with a heat reg each and larger racks would be a singular heavy or assault. collectively, the recons would have better heat dissipation... something like that.

BTW, since we're talking about missiles already. Has it ever been suggested to have indirect fire skill slightly improve accuracy when firing inside minimum range?

[Coyote27]

If you're going to give any advantages they should go to larger racks - after all, you have to sacrifice a bit more usually to get them.

[Thorgrim]

A bit more? An LRM12 weights double and occupies double space that of an LRM6, and does almost exactly the same in terms of damage in the long run. The LRM12 will sometimes produce concentrated damage hits but that's not so common to offset the extra weight/space.
If it requires double weight and space, it should deal ~double damage. Else there's no real reason for its existence.

[Burzmali]

Well, if you check the risk versus return on something like that you tend to come up short. The standard deviation of the damage done by the LRM12 on average in two salvos is much higher than the LRM6 with 4 salvos, so if you don't get a higher rate of damage, to-hit chance, or better weight or volume out of the LRM12 there is no reason to select it over the pair of LRM6.

[Sleeping_Dragon]

Good to see this discussion, I figured I was beating the system[:D]



2 SRM4s vs. 1 SRM8: same heat per salvo, same slots and wieght if they have the same # rnds, but the twin SRM4s recycle in 12secs vs the SRM8's 17secs... other factors not included: concentrated damage which got creamed for SRM/LRMs when the damage for a crit. went to >4, the posibility to only use 1 ammo slot for the larger racks to save slots, and the heat penalty avoidance as mentioned by Aquietfrog. the twin SRM4's are ~40% faster/better or SRM8s are only 70% as effective depending on how you look at the numbers, IF the titan can handle the increased heat per sec. For equal effect SRM8 would need to be an SRM11, maybe a SRM10 once other less quantifiable factors are calucated in OR the heat for the SRM8 would need to be ~8.
Unless I missed something which is entirely possible.

If I haven't missed anything... a drop to 8 heat for the SRM8 could effect some titan designs. Time consuming but could be checked for and corrected. SRM10s just sound potentially powerful, so I have the feeling I missed something... but if I didn't that's what the numbers are saying to me. Also combinations of effect are possible like a SRM9 with 9 heat. This don't even touch on less quantifiable factors like possible longer ranges or better to-hit mods for the larger racks... and that's just SRMs

Someone please poopoo these numbers and spot what I missed. I suspect I've undervalued some less quantifiable aspect of the SRMs. LRMs are more out of whack, definately need to put the heat in line with the rest of the racks at a bare minimum.

And while were on the subject of missles.... With NMs the heat is generated "per location hit" does this mean if 3 missle from the same salvo hit the same location (ie. 3 points of damage) then it's only counted once for adding the 1.8C of heat? If so this gives a huge advantage to NM7s over NM14s if your looking to heat up target. Or does "per location hit" actually mean " per missle that hits reguardless of location"?

[LarkinVB]

I feel a bit uneasy here. If you imrove on the big racks it might make them competitive to the smaller ones. But they seem to outclass comparable weapons of other types then. A LRM12 with recycle 15 for may be in line with two LRM6 but will put a AC20 to shame.

[LarkinVB]

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

If it requires double weight and space, it should deal ~double damage. Else there's no real reason for its existence.

Why are you so harsh ? You did know the rules for years and never complained [;)]

[Thorgrim]

Harsh? Not being harsh. Just stating my opinion. Come on, you know I was never a diplomatic kinda fella. [;)]
As for the rules, yes, so did everyone else. I never really liked the different recycle times because it's not very realistic, but it was balanced, and we all know how hard it was to balance those LRMs [:D]
I'm just pointing out that big racks "suck" when compared to smaller racks, that's all.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: LarkinVB

I feel a bit uneasy here. If you imrove on the big racks it might make them competitive to the smaller ones. But they seem to outclass comparable weapons of other types then. A LRM12 with recycle 15 for may be in line with two LRM6 but will put a AC20 to shame.

If the LRM12 has ~ the same recycle as the AC20, it deals max 24 damage and avr 16~18? Spread damage.

[LarkinVB]

Ok, so I will start my lonely work and tweak a bit here and there.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: Sleeping_Dragon
And while were on the subject of missles.... With NMs the heat is generated "per location hit" does this mean if 3 missle from the same salvo hit the same location (ie. 3 points of damage) then it's only counted once for adding the 1.8C of heat?

Yes.

If so this gives a huge advantage to NM7s over NM14s if your looking to heat up target. Or does "per location hit" actually mean " per missle that hits reguardless of location"?

This was what I edited out of one of my first posts about this subject. I didn't want to get into that just yet. It's not a huge advantage, but it's an advantage.

[LarkinVB]

Any ratio behind giving larger racks less heat compared to two half sized racks ? This might balance things a little bit.

EDIT: The more I think about past tweakings I come to the conclusion that there were good reasons for the heat/recycle values of the LRM12. Perhaps we shouldn't improve on them but worsen the LRM6 !

[LarkinVB]

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim

ORIGINAL: LarkinVB

I feel a bit uneasy here. If you imrove on the big racks it might make them competitive to the smaller ones. But they seem to outclass comparable weapons of other types then. A LRM12 with recycle 15 for may be in line with two LRM6 but will put a AC20 to shame.

If the LRM12 has ~ the same recycle as the AC20, it deals max 24 damage and avr 16~18? Spread damage.

at a greatly superior range .... But we can try and find out.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: aquietfrog

I think one other slight advantage a larger rack has is its ability to fire more missiles at a given heat level.

One slight disadvantage is that a damaged bigger rack fires all missiles at a penalty. One of the smaller racks damaged only affects half your firepower.
Bigger racks also have less reloads per ammo slot, so ammo slot crits (ammo loss) affects bigger racks in a bigger way.

the larger heat generation could be explained by thinking of each rack having an individual heat sink. smaller racks would be like multiple recons with a heat reg each and larger racks would be a singular heavy or assault. collectively, the recons would have better heat dissipation... something like that.

I think you're confusing things. Racks don't have heat *sinks*, they *produce* heat. The total opposite.

BTW, since we're talking about missiles already. Has it ever been suggested to have indirect fire skill slightly improve accuracy when firing inside minimum range?

Min range is about the weapon's tracking system. Doesn't have to do with the jock's skills.
And firing inside min doesn't mean firing indirect. At that range it's usually very direct.

[Thorgrim]

ORIGINAL: Thorgrim
I'm just pointing out that big racks "suck" when compared to smaller racks, that's all.

Point is, if right now you replace each LRM12 in the database for *one* LRM6, there'll be little difference in terms of performance (heat will actually be better), BUT, you'll get a few free slots and a lot of free tonnage (an LRM6 weights less than half an LRM12) for each replaced rack. Better systems, more armor,...

[Sleeping_Dragon]

ORIGINAL: LarkinVB

I feel a bit uneasy here. If you imrove on the big racks it might make them competitive to the smaller ones. But they seem to outclass comparable weapons of other types then. A LRM12 with recycle 15 for may be in line with two LRM6 but will put a AC20 to shame.

I feel uneasy about it also... but.... to approach it from a slightly differnet angle; Do 2 LRM6s put an AC20 to shame with the system the way it is now? If not, a 'true' double damage LRM12, shouldn't.

That said, LRM12s CAN'T be 'true' double damage LRM6s, else there's no reason to even have them. The 'less quantifiable factors' I mentioned in my earlier post have to come into play to give them distinctiveness.