Ok, I know I'm coming out of nowhere, but ah well.

CP said just before me;"personally, I feel that missiles should be things that SUPPLEMENT a dogfigh" The trouble being that the currently modeled missile system is pretty much dependant on the misisles own performance.

So we need to find some way to bring the player into the equation again, so that their actions and decisions have the same impact on how their misisles perform as guns and rockets, perhaps difficulty could be added to the lock on systems, the misisles made manueverable and potent, and more counters made available to the evading player?

Phaserlight: ..."The only missiles I can't think of a use for are fireflies and yellowjackets."

Exactly so, and I think these are the only missiles that need work. (ok, and mabey locust.) Otherwise, I am quite satisfied with the current selection and capabilities of missiles. I don't think the words "missile" and "dogfight" should be used in the same sentence. Missiles are for targets that can't dogfight (a rocket rag isn't really a dogfighter, but I still don't want to get my pretty pink vulture next to it).
It really sounds to me like people want better missiles so they won't have to dogfight as much or at all. As it stands now, the ultra lights are the deadlest ships in the game (in the right hands). And I don't have a problem with that state of affairs at all. Even though I know that a light fighter can kill (or at least survive) any other ship, I still fly a large number of other ships, including missile ships.
I see missiles in use all the time. They are very popular, and very effective. If they are so useless, why are so many people using them?

I don't know about that "using missles well strategy deal". I don't remember ever being killed by a missle while I played. It was only two months but I did quite a bit of pvp. Rockets, on the other hand, are effective. Swarms or gems or anything i would just boost off as soon as they got close and keep fighting. They're just tooooo slow.

Perhaps your right about the dogfight... if you make missiles too powerful. Missiles that are improved but not uber would make dogfights more interesting. Keeping an eye on the missles your opponent has fired and dodging when they get too close, etc. Maybe missles that are carried in packs of 5-8 could be single shot, long lasting, very fast, but very bad at maneuvering - but do considerable damage and knock the ship off course like a rocket. (By considerable damage I mean maybe 30%).

Using this a duelist would also have to consider the missles that an enemy has allready fired and are constantly turning back around towards him. Making missles destroyable would also help (and should be implemented for strategy's sake).

This is Battlestar Galictica with some annoying background music. I had to turn the sound off. Still, I think it does the job of saying what I think missles ought to do in the end all version of this game. http://youtube.com/watch?v=N9HbgTFvcr8

Some specific points I noticed is that the fighters don't have them. I think that if missles are to become quicker, thus more poweful, they ought to belong in the large port department anyways. This way, we can still have those priceless dogfights between fighter screens. Also, missle delivery systems really do need to weigh quite a bit. It's a poorly delivered statement to say that "missles are for lazy people who can't fight", because it implies that hard working individuals with great integrity only fly Corvus Vulturius with Law Enforcement Neuts. Makes one forget we're playing a game here. Still, there's truth in that statement, in that missles are best suited to heavy ships that fire at long distances. That little clip showed something really cool that we haven't seen yet in VO. Capital Ship class missles, which I think would be way past cool, what with those cute lil' smoke trails 'n all! ^-^

A very dramatic point of that video is when what's-his-face sees a missle headed towards him, and knowing that he has no way of evading it with his damaged engines merely stares in wide-eyed terror, only to be saved at the last moment by someone destroying the missle meters away. This scene implies alot about missles in BSG. If you're not flying in tip top condition, you're a sitting duck. So your 'moth can't outrun pirate's missles? That's tough, that's cheap. Franky, that's combat. Don't fly heavy freighters through guarded space, unless you can make damn sure you've got enough of a lead, and countermeasuers aboard. (I don't see any reason why proximity or concussion mines wouldn't destory oncoming missles, and if rumors are to be believed 'moths are supposed to need escorts anyways.) Seriously though, you don't outrun missles. http://youtube.com/watch?v=Waw_TqKl3Ss

The second thing that scene implies is that the missles they use don't have a large blast radius, and detonate nearly on contact, becuse if they did even his buddy's save would have fried what's-his-face due to the explosion. I like it that way, and it makes sense that they don't have really touchy proximity sensors, because that would make them easier to pick off with gunfire. In reality, a direct hit will always do way more damage than just being within the "blast radius". So, this would make missles a more sensible weapon when targeting larger, heavy ships as opposed to light fighters, and if they were restricted to large ports only, this missle vs. missle combat would be a unique form of dogfighting between the heavier classes of ships. And judging from the speed those missles are fired at, I'm guessing that they don't do any of that loop around and hit a second time crap you see in VO. You know what I'm talking about; You dodge a stingray once, wait exactly 10 seconds, and then have to dodge it again. Wash hands, repeat until your opponent runs out, and heads back to refill.

And so, these are the things I've noticed are in want of improving:
*More speed, less manuevering
*More damage, but less explosion radius.
*More variety, but restrict to large ports.
*Destroyable, but with a smaller proximity sensor
*More weight for the launcher,
*And less missles in a tube. 40 is just too much.

At the very least, it'd be nice to see a new missle designed with the above qualities so that we could test it out. The missles we have now have their place and purpose, but they'd do better to go under the name torpedo, methinks. And if missles are really in so much of a revamp as everyone says, it'll soon become an unsaid rule that any old missles in a duel are uncouth; only the new ones ought be used. Or if we're all wrong, the new missles will gain a reputation for being cheap, and be outlawed for most duels. Pretty please!?

I agree that missiles and rockets should be speedier. Maybe double speed, with all types of launched projectile adding on the ship's forward velocity.
I agree that they should have less of a blast radius, especially those damn flares which, even if they explode 50 m behind you, still give you like 1000 damage.
I agree that all types of missile and rocket should be destroyable.
I agree that missile and rocket launchers should be heavier than almost any energy weapon.

(40 missiles is only for swarms, which fire 8 per shot, so only 5 shots, really.)

However, there's gotta be SOME kind of countermeasure. Perhaps missiles require 2-5 seconds or so to lock on? Perhaps the launcher must keep the target within his line-of-sight or the missiles lose lock? I suppose you could shoot them down, but, heck, most people can't shoot down seekers. I like the idea of dropping countermeasures (like chaff and flares) or that dropping mines would zap missiles as well.

Yeah, lack of countermeasures it what's really prevented me from doing much with missiles. Even being able to shoot them (which you can now, some of them) is a very new thing and kind of a hack, but something I'm pushing for to make turret-defense against torpedoes actually work. So, I'm working towards most of the mentioned goals (including capship missile sprays, which I'm very jazzed about).. but I'll be approaching the PvP aspect more cautiously. I'll probably wait until countermeasures are ready before trying anything too wacky.. I'm always leery of grossly imbalancing things by some simple change with unforseen consequences.

IE: The last time missiles were fixed.

For those of you who don't know, missiles have always been kinda dumb. At one point, one of the devs (a1k0n?) realized that there was a mildly simple bug in the code that made missiles ridiculously stupid and fixed it. For one release, missiles were incredibly accurate, and seemed faster (they traveled at max velocity more often, or somesuch). Even the Yellowjacket was a formidable weapon. Then the devs realized that that was unbalanced and un-fixed missiles, making them what they are today.

Hmm, there've been a couple of bugs fixed at different points that had major impact on combat. At any rate, it's trivially easy for me to make missiles that are difficult (or practically impossible) to avoid. I just have to up their speed and maneuverability. But having "fire-and-forget death" mounted on every ship would certainly make pvp combat a lot more boring.

Hence, not until there are countermeasures.

if we had multi-user ships, like the moth heavy, we could have counter measure.

like the aerna seekers: i see them as missiles. the slightest pop on them makes them explode. so, if you have a multi-user moth heavy, one could man a turret as defense.

so, if a missile is fast enough to reach a slow moving target like a moth, then a player wielding some l-port pop-corn cannon out to easily get rid of incoming missiles.

lighter fighters could still out-maneuver the missiles and that's still not a problem.

cappies and other shield-equipped entities ward off missiles as they currently do: absorb them out.

for other semi-slow moving ships, dropping mines ought to act like flairs: attract/divert missiles and trigger them. same for rockets: they should detonate when in proximity w/ mines.

(did i mention i want multi-user ships?)

OK I can understand there is a lot of average/bad pvpers in VO atm hoping that if they only had better missiles their kill/death ratio would make them uber and highly respected.

Sadly, that wont be the case.

With better and deadlier missiles VO combat will enter a new era that wont be much liked by anybody except "lost pvp cases" and widely despised missile spamming members of VO community.

well, we could also limit the missile's ability to target only large objects.

a missile's effectiveness (maneuverability) could be determined by the size of the target it is tracking.

thus we avoid them becoming the anti-pvp weapon.

Alright guys, come on. I *just* finished typing a neat little article explaining why all your fears are unrealistic. Here's a summary:

*More speed, less manuevering
*More damage, but less explosion radius.
*More variety, but restrict to large ports.
*Destroyable, but with a smaller proximity sensor
*More weight for the launcher,
*And less missles in a tube. 40 is just too much.

Noone anywhere in this thread said "I wanna' make missles better!", and particularly nobody said so because of their lack of a positive kill/death ratio. Bojan, frankly you're an idiot.
Check it out, if we're willing to scrap realism in fear of tipping the scales of balance, then this it how it works; in order to get a 'lock on' when targeting someone at dogfighting distances, you'll need to keep your nose pointed at the leadoff indicator long enough and with enough accuracy that if you were firing Neuts you would have scored several hits anyways. The only difference is that the target will *still* have a chance to dodge your missles fired, and still have time to employ whatever countermeasures they have available. I thought that was already implied, because to make missles that were more powerful than guns in a PvP fight is really dumb.

In addition, another useful aspect of a missle is to fire it at long range, and hope that by the time it reaches your target it aquires a lock on enough to fudge its course and have a fair chance of hitting. I'm hoping for a real narrow cone of targeting here; If you watch some clips of missle fire, you'll notice that they take a really long time to carefully aim the suckers. And in space without an atmosphere to play with, fudging the course would be that much more difficult. Don't forget that the narrow cone makes targeting in dogfights probably less useful than actual guns. Add in the rest of the thoughts I put down there, including a hefty weight, smaller quanity of missles, and not letting small ports carry these cheap little 400kg swarm buckets we call "Geminis", it starts to look pretty darn fair. Missles are a long range eating utensil, like chopsticks. Guns are the knife and fork.

@ SuperMegaMynt: spot on! This sort of thing combined with UpperCase's suggestion seems to suggest we should consider making missiles "finicky." The overall goal would likely be to create a system with effective, but complex missiles.

Freespace 2 toyed with some different ideas to this end; such as IR guided missiles that easily acquire a lock, but don't hold a lock easily. through a combination of decent maneuvering skills and countermeasures; the missiles can be avoided. SuperMegaMynt touched on another concept FS2 as well as a number of other modern shooters use, which is a lock on system that requires you to actually aim with skill.

Furthermore, Super's conclusion that we should specialise guns and misssiles to their specific ranges is an intriguing one, but it should probably be approached with caution, since this could relegate a good missile user with a strong initial advantage over a gun user, but this all depends, in the end, on fine balance in missile behavior.

For an analogy, take *any* fantasy based mmorpg out there. Missle users are the 'mages', and have a strong initial advantage in the fight due to their range and sufficient damage. However, aiming and timing your spells/missles often takes timing, if not skill, and the natural vunerability of most magic classes makes the "finicky" at best. To contrast, guns are the melee classes that benefit from boons such as unlimited mana/ammo, excellent AC/dodging, and ruthless damage when up close, particularly against those mages/missle boats who don't have much in the way of AC/dodging. A neat little trick to finding out why this is more than coincidence is to trace the historical routes of where the fairy tale concept of fireballs came from, (Alchemists) and where the concept of chemically advanced missles also stemmed from. (Also alchemists - "al")

Anywho, following the fantasy to Sci Fi rpg analogy, the key to most effective grouping involves a balance between missle boats and fighters to cover them. Right now in VO that's 'spot on', which I think is freakin' sweet. And concerning fights between the two, you're right; at first the missle guy has the upper hand, due to range, but later on the gun guy gets great situational advantage because missles get tricky to aim at close distances. Plus they're pretty easy to dodge. So the natural conclusion is that missle dude wants to drag the fight out, so that he can get more distance between the opponent and he, whereas the gun man wants to keep things close. But wait! The other line of thinking goes that our neighborhood missle fella' wants to end the fight quick, because he has a limited supply of ammo, whereas the longer the fight drags on for our resident gun slinger, the more likely it is that he'll find himself in a position where his opponent is stock out of missles to fire, and then the feast begins.

This kind of natural balance has been around in combat ever since the first ranged weaponry was invented. Even today these balancing issues have a way of solving themselves, once countermeasures are in place.

Although I'm not really supportive of missiles as they are in VO, I think that's a sign that some changes are actually needed. I just have a couple things to add...

Instead of using directed countermeasures, it'd fit in more with the general theme if dodging missiles were a twitch based skill. Let 'em accelerate instead of pooping out at their max speeds. Let there be a 2-3 second period where the missile gradually warms up to dangerous velocities, like 15m/s the first second, 45m/s the second second, and finally a good 90m/s and upwards at the third. This way targets actually have time to realize they've got a missile headed at them. They have time to barrel roll out of the way or whatever.

And for the love of god, can we shorten up the life of missiles so you only have to dodge them once? That's the one thing that makes swarms dangerous these days. They're ridiculously easy to dodge the first time, but when there's three clouds going behind me, and all I hear is a buzz of 'beeps' warning me that there are missiles somewhere in the sector but I can't differentiate how close, and the back radar doesn't show how close they are to hitting me, *that's* what makes 'em dangerous. Not the homing (which sucks) not the speed (I can dodge neuts, why would a retarded version of a sunflare give me any trouble?), just the very un-twitch based skill test of mentally calculating when those missiles are going to come back and hit me in the butt.

Countermeasures are unnecessary. Missiles simply need to follow a path that is able to be dodged.

Heavy ships should be able to dodge them just as effectively as Light ships, the difference being they'd need more time to get out of the way. Cool huh? The advantage maneuverable ships have is that they can deal with dangerous situations more flexibly. Fine. That's kind of how it is, if you turbo out of the way whenever a missiles headed towards you. That's... not so fine. Kind of boring actually.

Missiles currently are incredibly agile... or something because I usually have to dodge them 3 or 4 times. Which is obnoxious because they're also quite slow, so it takes awhile. Boring really. Is it me, or is that completely ass-backwards? A missile that was very fast, but not so quick would be very entertaining to dodge. I'll bet I could do it sub-turbo speeds in a moth, as long as I had it in sight ahead of time. Why, I believe I could just hear Peppy in my head now, "Do a barrel roll!". Glorious, truly.

Okay, so they're still too powerful? Let them aim for the point where it's target was, X seconds ago. Call that statistic the, ugh, "sensor strength" or some bullshit. This way they lose effectiveness point-blank. So now ships rapidly changing directions are harder to hit, and we have a twitch-based countermeasure instead of the magical anti-missile device which without your absolutely screwed, and instead of boosting for 20 seconds each volley. *zzzZZZzzzz*