Is there any reason for a normal person to fit missiles?

[Fost]

Would you mind clarify WHY you think they should and why not for ALL other weapons as well?

Yeah no prob, here's my thinking: Mines (to me) are something passive that could be ejected in the same way cargo is.
Even missiles need some kind of launch pylon and obviously launching a laser would make no sense
In addition they are a nice way to confuse a chasing enemy so are good for trader vessels which would have more cargo space available.
Currently they seem to get very little love at all so with the above change even bounty hunting ships could carry a few in their smaller holds.


Would support a slight buff of all explosive weapons.
They used to be fun but were abused in pvp.
A shame there wasn't a better solution to the dumbfire quick kills that were happening.

 

[CMDR Kiethoo Wolfsong]

I used to run 2 Med Beams and 4 Small Seeker Racks.

For awhile it seemed like a great set up against any ships.
But now I don't enjoy them at all.
Sometimes I think the damage doesnt even work....I fired 2 at a Scout and they HIT the ship and did 44% hull damage. Fired the next salvo...again IT HIT...did 3% hull damage. ( No ESM/Turret, I saw it hit the hull )
Sometimes I think if I fire all 4 that the first missile exploding causes the other 3 to detonate early and do less damage.

Anyways Ive switched to using 2 Rail Guns and 2 Torpedos Tubes instead. I use the Rail Guns for Smaller Ships and save the 2 tubes for any Big Game I find.
Much more fun.

 

[Obsidian Ant]

I miss the day's when you could actually fight back in a freighter. All missile/torpedo loadout on my T9.. I used to enjoy getting interdicted by cmdr's back then.

I used to love doing this too. Back then there was no delay between firing missiles either, so you could unload the entire rack almost instantly. Would make even Anacondas run.

 

[Space Fan]

Is there any reason for a normal person to fit missiles?


Do you mean in the game, or in everyday life?

 

[Io_Sys]

I definitely agree with that. I want to like frag cannons, it's basically a shotgun for your ship, but it has too little ammo, and fires too quickly.

I think ammo should be able to be stored in cargo. You equip a module, the size of the module depends on the weapon size you wish to reload. Class 4 module, for the c4 hardpoints, class 3 for c3 hardpoint, etc. It could be balanced by needing a minute or 2 to reload, during which you can not deploy hardpoints.

I think that would give a lot more use to the lesser used weapons, frags, railguns, missiles, and torps.

Lost track of the amount of times people have suggested this. An internal magazine capable of carrying ammunition would be perfect.
Something like 5% of the max weapon ammo per class and rank of ammo rack-- so a class 2 rack D rack could carry like 10% more ammo. C2 A rack could carry like 25%. Class 3 D, 15%, C3A 45%.


I really hope they fix missiles at some point. Big fan of missiles in pretty much any game with them.

 

[CMDR Mansoul]

I definitely agree with that. I want to like frag cannons, it's basically a shotgun for your ship, but it has too little ammo, and fires too quickly.

I think ammo should be able to be stored in cargo. You equip a module, the size of the module depends on the weapon size you wish to reload. Class 4 module, for the c4 hardpoints, class 3 for c3 hardpoint, etc. It could be balanced by needing a minute or 2 to reload, during which you can not deploy hardpoints.

I think that would give a lot more use to the lesser used weapons, frags, railguns, missiles, and torps.

More ammo would have another major benefit: it would reduce the gap between "PVP builds" and "PVE builds". That would allow more PVE combat oriented commanders to hold their own against ships fitted for short sharp encounters. It would bring more people to open, and allow them to stand and fight once there.

 

[Globusdiablo]

...just wondering if there's any normal person using missiles and if you do, I'd be intrigued to know the reasons.

Not sure I consider myself normal, but I simply enjoy deploying them (edit: or is the correct term to fire them?). Be they heat seeking or dumbfire.

I haven't used them in a while though, as they seem sadly nerfed? Last I tried them they didn't even leave a dent on a Vipers shield, so I removed them again.

Back in beta I could take out ships with a face full of dumbfire at close range, and that was FUN!

 

[Majinvash]

I was using heat seekers on my attack Adder in Eravate last week.
They still do decent enough damage to unshielded ships but they are slow to fire and a little buggy in actually hitting things that aren't super close.

They are fundamentally useless but fun and look cool.
The fun and look cool part is the only reason I still use them now and again.

I await the next nerf to things we love in 1.4

Majinvash

 

[ozrix84]

Missiles are devastating on smaller ships that have had their shields taken down... two at once is always nice and satisfying. Although against anything larger than a Cobra I would only use them against sub-systems.

How effective are they against subsystems?

 

[Balfuset790]

I will go with twin Pack launchers and quad beams on my ASP - wouldhave used twin beams and 4 pack launchers if they had been available in "small" size.

How do Pack launchers compare to regular missiles in terms of damage, other than looking freaking amazing?

 

[Space Fan]

You asked that question?? that's funny Man, you should not be allowed to fit anything that you may hurt yourself with! lolol

Well, I was a bit worried that he might get arrested if we said it was normal.

 

[Sire]

Sorry but... what's a rift?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Is there any reason for a normal person to fit missiles?


Do you mean in the game, or in everyday life?

You almost had me blarf out loud in the office.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I really hope they fix missiles at some point. Big fan of missiles in pretty much any game with them.

In order for FD to fix them, they would have to be broken.

They are fairly niche weapons, you don't usually take them to combat zones or anywhere you want to stay for a while, but for single target missions they are very nice.

 

[Space Fan]

You almost had me blarf out loud in the office.

My Admiral advises:

Get back to work young man.

Fly hard and live long.

Peace through Force (Rights reserved.)

Yours aye,

Vincent KILLER (Adm., rtd.)

***** ******* Navy

 

[Winterwalker]

In order for FD to fix them, they would have to be broken.

They are fairly niche weapons, you don't usually take them to combat zones or anywhere you want to stay for a while, but for single target missions they are very nice.

There's also plenty scope for higher classes of warhead on your seeker / dumbfire missiles
(armour penetrating / exploting tip / em shield bursters / incendiary?)

Mines do seem a bit .. But when people talk about carrying mines in cargo, booby-trapped cargo I think would be great. Disguised as "gold" (or at least, a random content of computer componets / platinum / "resonating separators" .. detecting bits of the detonator or TNT) Even if your ship was destroyed there could remain, a warm and fuzzy feeling that you might still be killing the pirate who scooped your cargo, even if you're having to visit the rebuy screen?

 

[Io_Sys]

How effective are they against subsystems?

Pretty much useless. Armour Pen F compared with say, A on a pulse laser. Only good for raw hull damage.

How do Pack launchers compare to regular missiles in terms of damage, other than looking freaking amazing?

One pack of missiles essentially equals a single seeker-- but you get more chances to bypass point defence if for some ungodly reason someone actually went and equipped it.
Still gonna get me some, just for the rule of cool. I think they have pretty bad heat buildup though.


@Agony_Aunt: C2 missile racks require 1.2MJ. C1 needs .40 and .60 for DF and seeker respectively.
Remember the only advantage to the C2s is magazine capacity. Unlike other C2 weapons there's no size/damage bonus as they're treated as C1 weapons.
You're telling me they require more power than a beam laser for a few more missiles in the hopper?

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Although against anything larger than a Cobra I would only use them against sub-systems.

I wouldn't, because they don't do any noticeble damage to subsystems (could upload videos as a proof) - or did you mean Torpedoes?

Sorry but... what's a rift?

An Occulus Rift - VR goggles.

 

[IronGremlin]

I definitely agree with that. I want to like frag cannons, it's basically a shotgun for your ship, but it has too little ammo, and fires too quickly.

I think ammo should be able to be stored in cargo. You equip a module, the size of the module depends on the weapon size you wish to reload. Class 4 module, for the c4 hardpoints, class 3 for c3 hardpoint, etc. It could be balanced by needing a minute or 2 to reload, during which you can not deploy hardpoints.

I think that would give a lot more use to the lesser used weapons, frags, railguns, missiles, and torps.

I really, really like this idea. I think that the current weapon balance around ammo is primarily concerned with damage potential per engagement, which IMO is a good thing - having 10x the ammo in a railgun or a torpedo tube available in one fight would break the game.

I think that all weapons currently in game are balanced in a stand up single fight - save mines, which are buggy.
So what we really need is a way to restock that wouldn't work in combat, but would be faster than running all the way home, and I think your idea would accomplish that perfectly.

 

[geoffrey.hdt]

I wouldn't, because they don't do any noticeble damage to subsystems (could upload videos as a proof) - or did you mean Torpedoes?

I tested that, and they do not do damage to the powerplant at least.
Against external modules, i have read that they do not as well.

Now the confusion may come from torpedos which apparently do great damage to modules and are faster than seekers.
Even thinking to equip one or two next time I go pirate...to kill the thrusters.