General Rebalancing Missiles

I propose a global rebalancing of all weapons and combat in the game. And to do this you only need to do two things:
1. Part of the suspension points for the weapons on all ships to make available only for missile weapons. (missiles, mines, torpedoes)
2. Increase the safety of these weapons by at least 3 times.
 
This game has room to improve in so many aspects, it would be better to start anew from scratch... Frontier should gather the info they need from Elite (4) Dangerous now and start working on Elite 5:

  • same galaxy;
  • networking engine for massive multiplayer capabilities;
  • revamped power play/C&P;
  • new upgrade system (engineering) for ships and on-foot weapons/modules/suits;
  • new planet generation tech;
  • DLSS/FSR/DLAA Anti-Aliasing tech;
  • ships balance and new ships;
  • new vehicles;
  • player-based economies/trading/manufacturing;
  • player owned bases/buildings;
  • atmospheric landings;
  • gas giants dense atmosferic activities;


Feel free to add anything that comes to mind and or suits your needs...
 
This game has room to improve in so many aspects, it would be better to start anew from scratch... Frontier should gather the info they need from Elite (4) Dangerous now and start working on Elite 5:

  • same galaxy;
  • networking engine for massive multiplayer capabilities;
  • revamped power play/C&P;
  • new upgrade system (engineering) for ships and on-foot weapons/modules/suits;
  • new planet generation tech;
  • DLSS/FSR/DLAA Anti-Aliasing tech;
  • ships balance and new ships;
  • new vehicles;
  • player-based economies/trading/manufacturing;
  • player owned bases/buildings;
  • atmospheric landings;
  • gas giants dense atmosferic activities;


Feel free to add anything that comes to mind and or suits your needs...

Or, rather than starting everything from scratch and taking another 10 years to get to the same point, how about they just continue working on the current game?
 
Feel free to add anything that comes to mind and or suits your needs...
If you've played ED, you're likely to have thought of this: Why the game has such a great weapon as a rocket, but as a rule, people do not use it. But if you when you play in PvE all the NPC in a row are starting to fill you with missiles. Why is this?
 
You want them all nerfed?
I don't quite understand how YOU. Who to lower? Here, for example, many complain about the FDL offer to reduce it. It's very simple: 2 small slots in the FDL (for example) are given only for missiles . Well, etc.
 
I don't quite understand how YOU. Who to lower? Here, for example, many complain about the FDL offer to reduce it. It's very simple: 2 small slots in the FDL (for example) are given only for missiles . Well, etc.

I'm not sure what you are actually saying. Why is YOU in capitals? What does making the 2 small slots in the FdL be only for missiles have to do with what i wrote?

My post was a joke comment about FD's history with rebalancing weapons, especially missiles (and torps).
 
Or, rather than starting everything from scratch and taking another 10 years to get to the same point, how about they just continue working on the current game?
Too many things to be fixed that were built one upon another... to the point they can't fix something without breaking another... therefore leading to "better leave it behind" situation we're currently in...
 
I don't quite understand how YOU. Who to lower? Here, for example, many complain about the FDL offer to reduce it. It's very simple: 2 small slots in the FDL (for example) are given only for missiles . Well, etc.
I do understand your point about missiles... but again, they can improve missiles, they can reduce other weapons damage output... at the end it is actually balancing them all... and engineering was supposed to bring balance to the game... now the time to fix it all is long passed...
 
In my opinion, the problem isn't that missiles themselves are particularly out of balance, the problem is that they need to compete directly against more broadly useful options.

There are quite a few weapons that have the same problem; they exist to serve a particular utility, but you don't run into that very often, so it is rarely a good idea to try using them.

And I don't think just making them stronger is a good solution. More often than not, this only results into weapons that do exactly the same thing with different visual effects, which isn't what you are after, either.

Missiles, in particular, I think would largely benefit from being equipable in utilities slots. They serve functionally the same purpose; consider, for example, a small Seeker missile rack, which has 16 missiles. That is on broadly the same level as chaff as far as how often you can use it. So why not just make it a utility?

Plus, since Shield tanks generally put their own utility slots to a more powerful use, offering alternative utility options would make hull and hybrid tanks more powerful by comparison, since they could get more out of their utility slots than an equivalent Shield tank.

So not only do you make missile racks more powerful and useful, you also make other alternative build Styles more powerful and useful. Seems like everybody wins!
 
In my opinion, the problem isn't that missiles themselves are particularly out of balance, the problem is that they need to compete directly against more broadly useful options.

There are quite a few weapons that have the same problem; they exist to serve a particular utility, but you don't run into that very often, so it is rarely a good idea to try using them.

And I don't think just making them stronger is a good solution. More often than not, this only results into weapons that do exactly the same thing with different visual effects, which isn't what you are after, either.

Missiles, in particular, I think would largely benefit from being equipable in utilities slots. They serve functionally the same purpose; consider, for example, a small Seeker missile rack, which has 16 missiles. That is on broadly the same level as chaff as far as how often you can use it. So why not just make it a utility?

Plus, since Shield tanks generally put their own utility slots to a more powerful use, offering alternative utility options would make hull and hybrid tanks more powerful by comparison, since they could get more out of their utility slots than an equivalent Shield tank.

So not only do you make missile racks more powerful and useful, you also make other alternative build Styles more powerful and useful. Seems like everybody wins!
There are plenty of utility slots as it is. But mandatory missile weapon slots will encourage everyone to use missiles and eventually battles will change their nature.
 
There are plenty of utility slots as it is. But mandatory missile weapon slots will encourage everyone to use missiles and eventually battles will change their nature.

How does 'Mandatory' become 'Encourage'? That is forced, not encouraged... That is like holding someone under water and 'encouraging' them to hold their breath so they dont drown.
 
How does 'Mandatory' become 'Encourage'? That is forced, not encouraged... That is like holding someone under water and 'encouraging' them to hold their breath so they dont drown.
It must be the translation difficulties.
They don't encourage it, they force it. For example, like military slots.
 
Last edited:
Or, rather than starting everything from scratch and taking another 10 years to get to the same point, how about they just continue working on the current game?
I've got to say I like playing ED now. I'm not sure I'll be able to start playing a new game in ten years' time...
 
Missile launchers have no damage-related engineering. So no Overcharged/Short-range for the 70%/75% damage bonus. Though ultimately all of these ammunition-limited weapons have greatly suffered due to the shield/hull inflation - not only the generator/armor get engineered, but every module boosting it aswell so you get enormous health/resistance stacking.
 
Missile launchers have no damage-related engineering. So no Overcharged/Short-range for the 70%/75% damage bonus. Though ultimately all of these ammunition-limited weapons have greatly suffered due to the shield/hull inflation - not only the generator/armor get engineered, but every module boosting it aswell so you get enormous health/resistance stacking.
I was thinking about how to enforce the missiles without amplifying them in terms of power, so I came up with this. But missiles have a limited amount of ammunition, so I decided to at least triple it.
Again, just reinforcing a weapon can make it possible to forget about other weapons and will not guarantee that different types of weapons will be used.
 
Last edited:
I was thinking about how to enforce the missiles without amplifying them in terms of power, so I came up with this. But missiles have a limited amount of ammunition, so I decided to at least triple it.
Oh, I understand now. Ship hardpoints exclusive for missiles and 3x ammo. I like it!
 
Why force people to use missiles? Why not make cannons mandatory? Same logic. You could just use missiles yourself with high capacity engineering.

Part of what makes this game attractive to people is the ability to customise your ship with minimal restrictions, which is why passenger cabins were removed as a requirement for Saud Kruger ships, which ended up being a popular move. It wouldn't make sense to remove restrictions on one hand and then add add restrictions later on, for no real benefit.
 
Why force people to use missiles? Why not make cannons mandatory? Same logic. You could just use missiles yourself with high capacity engineering.

Part of what makes this game attractive to people is the ability to customise your ship with minimal restrictions, which is why passenger cabins were removed as a requirement for Saud Kruger ships, which ended up being a popular move. It wouldn't make sense to remove restrictions on one hand and then add add restrictions later on, for no real benefit.
Do you use rockets ? If not, why not?
And your example is not correct.
Have you thought about why there are military slots and the main slots have rigid classes?
You can't put a 2nd class sensor on a T10.
 
Do you use rockets ? If not, why not?
And your example is not correct.
Have you thought about why there are military slots and the main slots have rigid classes?
You can't put a 2nd class sensor on a T10.
I do use them, occasionally, but I wouldn't want them on every ship I build.

Military slots, and I'm amazed this has to be explained again as this is said every time this comes up, are additional slots that were added to military ships. They are a bonus to add to survivability, not a limitation to slots that otherwise could be used for cargo etc. That's like saying you can't put a cargo bay in your armour slot.
 
Back
Top Bottom