Confirmed: Dirtleg missiles far more powerful than ship missiles

[VR Lucian Arkright]

cant reallly compare modern missiles vs modern aircraft and ships hulls in elite. Modern aircraft are fragile, (other than a couple of exceptions) and missile warheads are designed to destroy them via shrapnel caused by proximity fuses. Even a sidewinder has the same mass as a modern tank so there is not a hope in heck a shoulder launched missile is going to dent it, since there is always an arms race of threat vs defence(I.e a missile is developed to blow up X armour, said X armour is upgraded to defeat missile and so on)

But we also have a couple of thousand years of weapons development to consider. My point being, that a shoulder fired Missile launcher should be able to carry a warhead in the same class as a ship launched weapon, just at much lesser ranges.

A ship launched seeker missle is not capable of a one shot kill on a Sidewinder, but is a significant threat. A shoulder launcher missle would/should be a little less damaging, just a lot shorter ranged.

 

[here_it_comes]

Sounds like a somewhat strange notion considering how the newbie ships melt like butter next to an A-class star when engaging G5 engineered ships. If anything, I could imagine an engineered Corvette taking a million rockets to shoot down as usual, whereas unengineered paper cobras being ganked from the skies.

You don't see that this choice of power dynamics re base ED CMDRs and Horizons CMDRs simply mirrors what I say will happen with the relative power dynamics re CMDRs and dirtlegs? Your observation supports that what I wrote will be the case.

 

[Shanaeri]

But we also have a couple of thousand years of weapons development to consider. My point being, that a shoulder fired Missile launcher should be able to carry a warhead in the same class as a ship launched weapon, just at much lesser ranges.

A ship launched seeker missle is not capable of a one shot kill on a Sidewinder, but is a significant threat. A shoulder launcher missle would/should be a little less damaging, just a lot shorter ranged.

As I said,defence and offence compete for supremacy that tends to equal out. Besides, there is also the practical aspect in that if a hand held weapon that weights say 30kg can cause more damage than an 8 ton missile launcher I’ll just mount 266 shoulder launched missiles on my ship instead. It’s just silly.

 

[Linnunrata]

You don't see that this choice of power dynamics re base ED CMDRs and Horizons CMDRs simply mirrors what I say will happen with the relative power dynamics re CMDRs and dirtlegs? Your observation supports that what I wrote will be the case.

No, not really, unless by power dynamics you mean the existing drastic power gradient in the game between the new guys and the old guys that will probably carry on to EDO.

As a relatively new player I never experienced the relative power difference between ED base and Horizons (it was probably a very bad idea not to buy the expansion if you expected to share the field with guys who did), but definitely did experience the gap between stock ships and end game engineering. I expect this to carry on to EDO pretty straightforwardly - engineered MANPADS will pose a significant threat mostly to non-engineered and smallish ships (assuming similar damage gradient as in the current live game), flown by new guys whereas legacy players flying end game engineered shield sponges will shield sponge.

 

[Linnunrata]

But we also have a couple of thousand years of weapons development to consider.

I see some serious regression in that development with someone coming up with dumbfire missiles in space. In space.

 

[here_it_comes]

No, not really, unless by power dynamics you mean the existing drastic power gradient in the game between the new guys and the old guys that will probably carry on to EDO.

That's what I mean, more or less.

 

[Linnunrata]

That's what I mean, more or less.

If that is the case, I don't see how it puts the new guy on the pedastal and makes them feel powerful. If something, it'll just continue the tradition that the old vet with thousands of hours, trillion credits and full engineering will teabag new guys from space to tenuous atmosphere.

 

[here_it_comes]

The new guys are the dirtleggers here for FPS, the old guys are the CMDRs.

This, combined with what I posted re
craft/infantry power dynamics, is why dirtlegs weaponry will be ludicrously powerful. It's FD's only viable option with ED.

 

[VR Lucian Arkright]

As I said,defence and offence compete for supremacy that tends to equal out. Besides, there is also the practical aspect in that if a hand held weapon that weights say 30kg can cause more damage than an 8 ton missile launcher I’ll just mount 266 shoulder launched missiles on my ship instead. It’s just silly.

Which isn't what I said...

shrugs

 

[Linnunrata]

The new guys are the dirtleggers here for FPS

I'm still extremely skeptical that there will be a significant contingent of these guys, and those that will come will be really frustrated about the fact that they will really need to fly spaceships to be anything in the game. I love Elite and all, and Odyssey will be a worthy addon to it introducing space legs, but from the perspective of an FPS player I wouldn't touch Odyssey with a ten foot pole unless they do miracles with the final release.

Maybe I'm wrong. It remains to be seen.

 

[here_it_comes]

I'm still extremely skeptical that there will be a significant contingent of these guys...

I agree, but FD clearly hopes otherwise.

 

[Morbad]

FDev threw the cube-square law, and all it implies, out the window years ago. The result is a surrealistic collection of mechanisms that should be mutually exclusive.

Make ships de facto immune to infantry firepower, or make infantry firepower ludicrously powerful compared to massive ship weaponry. The first option would alienate and anger the fresh blood EDO does bring in, while the second will make the fresh blood feel powerful while jading the legacy players.

Ships can be de facto immune to small arms, melee attacks, and even most man-portable weapon systems, without being immune to infantry directed assets. Most bases/outposts have defensive weapon emplacements, for example. The ability to have them target opponents, or even be manually possessed and controlled like an SRV or multi-crew ship turret should be a given. Indeed, this has been a thing in tactical shooters for more than twenty years.

Even a sidewinder has the same mass as a modern tank so there is not a hope in heck a shoulder launched missile is going to dent it, since there is always an arms race of threat vs defence(I.e a missile is developed to blow up X armour, said X armour is upgraded to defeat missile and so on)

A Sidewinder has much more volume, and density decreases rapidly as ship size increases.

There are also shoulder launched missiles that are serious threats to modern MBTs.

But we also have a couple of thousand years of weapons development to consider. My point being, that a shoulder fired Missile launcher should be able to carry a warhead in the same class as a ship launched weapon, just at much lesser ranges.

A ship launched seeker missle is not capable of a one shot kill on a Sidewinder, but is a significant threat. A shoulder launcher missle would/should be a little less damaging, just a lot shorter ranged.

The model for a ship-mounted seeker is about a hundred times the volume of the largest missile that could possibly fit in the infantry rocket launcher we have in EDO.

Ship mounted weapons shouldn't just be longer range, they should be delivering vastly larger payloads capable of at least an order of magnitude more destructive power.

 

[Adept]

That sounds disgusting.

I know Seekers and even dumbfires have been balanced as bottle rockets, but a MANPAD then blowing up a ship... come on devs! Have some respect for the world you're building.

 

[here_it_comes]

Ships can be de facto immune to small arms, melee attacks, and even most man-portable weapon systems, without being immune to infantry directed assets. Most bases/outposts have defensive weapon emplacements, for example. The ability to have them target opponents, or even be manually possessed and controlled like an SRV or multi-crew ship turret should be a given. Indeed, this has been a thing in tactical shooters for more than twenty years.

This would be a viable way to make it all work nicely, and the one I'd hope FD goes for. While it could be said this would basically make ships invulnerable vs dirtlegs outside settlements, it is also moot as the dirtlegs are rarely going to be elsewhere. Unfortunately, we haven't seen any signs of this route being taken and have only received direct indicators that FD intends dirtlegs to endanger ships directly. Else, they wouldn't have told us about grenades (of all things) being damaging to ships.

There are also shoulder launched missiles that are serious threats to modern MBTs.

True, but the issue here isn't specifically that dirtlegs will have the capacity to harm ships, but rather that their capacity to harm ships is going to be disproportionately greater than ship's ability to harm other ships. It would be like infantry being able to disable/destroy a MBT in a few hits with their AT weaponry, but the MBTs have to score 20 hits to disable/destroy a MBT.

The model for a ship-mounted seeker is about a hundred times the volume of the largest missile that could possibly fit in the infantry rocket launcher we have in EDO.

Ship mounted weapons shouldn't just be longer range, they should be delivering vastly larger payloads capable of at least an order of magnitude more destructive power.

Precisely. This is all getting so whacky. It was easier to gloss over when it was just ships, but now that dirtlegs are in the mix the sheer bonkers-ness of it all is pretty glaring.

 

[Gunther_Bladderburst]

I like how armchair experts compare manpads to fighter/helicopter launched missiles and try to bend logic and teach you how a handheld weapon is more powerful than something 5 to 10 times its size.

 

[Adept]

I see some serious regression in that development with someone coming up with dumbfire missiles in space. In space.

Funnily enough, changing trajectory is easy and effective inside an atmosphere. Non-guided, fast projectiles are quite believable in vacuum.

Of course the non-accelerating missiles in Elite are really weird.

 

[Linnunrata]

Funnily enough, changing trajectory is easy and effective inside an atmosphere. Non-guided, fast projectiles are quite believable in vacuum.

Maybe in some different framework of combat logic with distances and non-unlimited thruster power, but obviously not in Elite where distances are extremely short and ships turn on a penny.

 

[Linnunrata]

Then again, speaking of non-guided fast projectiles, supposedly near c travelling projectiles shot by railguns have an effective range of around 3000 metres and all that energy in the projectile is usually not a dealbreaker for the target hit, so who knows.

 

[VR Lucian Arkright]

I like how armchair experts compare manpads to fighter/helicopter launched missiles and try to bend logic and teach you how a handheld weapon is more powerful than something 5 to 10 times its size.

Not sure where anyone has said that.

 

[VR Lucian Arkright]

We tried to take down the Adder last night. Three people with rocket launchers, trying to take the ship down.

We couldn't. We ran out of missiles. Approximately 30 went in and the ship was still at 50%

Apologies about the rubbish video capture.

From what I can see, the Shoulder Launched Missile isn't exactly one-shotting Adders shrugs