You do realize that these changes would completely destroy the balance of the game and require at a minimum another three months of testing? Implementing them on the live server would be insane. In fact, implementing them on anything other than a test server like the old universe and letting people mess with them would be insane. You may not like the way weapons work, but totally overhauling the system means ruining the game AGAIN, something I'd rather not go through. Everything is finally coming into place where balance is within reach.

Yes, it DOES change the balance. It's SUPPOSED to. Missiles are essentially expensive distractions, with very few chances of hitting their targets. This makes Ragnaroks especially vulnerable because they're slow and unmaneuverable. They have lots of weapon ports, but that means they have to get one or two devastating salvos in before they're totally destroyed. And at that, they're lucky to get those salvos in. With new missiles, they have a purpose as a support ship.

It changes the dynamics of fighting so that it's not the same gun dance EVERY SINGLE TIME. Missiles will play an important role in the weapons mix, and it'll be important to optimize your mix for the type of combat that you'll be expecting to engage in (solo close-combat, solo chasing, group close-combat, group support, etc).

Please comment on the >3 months needed to balance your changes, and the fact that the game will be largely broken during that time period.

All I know, is that missiles are an eyesore in a set of largely skill based weps.

I actually don't think that it would ruin the balance, since if the payload is less than rockets, and you only have to dodge the missile once, then its really not too much different than a rail.

Missiles, AGT, and the rocketram... these tend to take away from the skill involved. I'll play against them, as long as their here, cuz I think it makes ME better, but I wish there was something more to them.

Would it have to take three months? Why couldn't they implement it first on their internal servers to make sure nothing's broken, and then upload it? And the actual balancing would probably really just be tweaks to the effectiveness of the seekers, and the difficult of the lock-on. I think the damage ratings, and the weights are just fine, considering that they're written basically within the framework of the game's existing missiles.

I think that even if it does break something, the end result would be worth it. As it is, missiles serve no real purpose other than to simply spam and hope something hits. With better seekers (and tougher lock-on sequences to require actual work on the pilot's part), they're less shoot-and-pray, and become part of viable tactics.

I would support better missles IF they were thouroughly tested first. Realistically, I can't expect four people to test the missles thoroughly, and balance takes at least a week to assess. I don't want missles to return to their pre-nerf godliness, not even for a week. The game is finally settling down. I'd rather it stay that way.

IF the devs make a test server, or test it amongst themselves very, very thoroughly, sure. Go for it. But if it's basically Incarnate changing some values in a table and then uploading it to see what happens, no.

I still think that this would be worth the effort to implement, so I'm bumping it.

^bump

I agree.

Nice work CP.

Missiles are SUPPOSED to be faster than the ships. I regularly outrun missiles that I launch, that's silly.
Missiles should go at around 180 m/s minimum and I like the "Keeping them in the sights" target cone proposed by CP.

Perhaps the really expensive missiles would be "fire-and-forget" but there needs to be some way to avoid these. They can't just be a death sentence for lighter ships.

AWACS-type loadout for a ship could be cargo instead of a weapons load, just a very heavy piece of equipment that must be carried in a Behemoth since it's 100 cu's.

But Starfisher is also right - I think the devs are trying to make a game where your individual piloting/shooting/strategy skill is what wins battles, not whether you are rich enough in-game to afford good missiles which are fire-and-forget for lazy pilots. Making sure that missiles don't screw everything up is important. Countermeasures would need to be introduced, which would necessitate more ports for things like chaff/flares, which would necessitate all ships to be redesigned and re-tested. 3 months is a good estimate in my opinion.

If better missiles are not balanced by some kind of countermeasures, then V-O will no longer be a game of piloting skill, but a game of who launches the most missiles first from their Ragnarok. Seems boring.

The way it is now encourages dogfighting and that is far better in my opinion. Missiles would be cool but for now I think it is best to wait.

For the Fire-and-Forget missiles, they're slower than most ships' boost speeds I think the highest speed I proposed is 180m/s, which is fast enough to catch a target nearby whom you're engaged in battle with, but slow enough that a quick pilot can get away. And even the most expensive missiles have been made more difficult to employ, so the lazy "missile spammer" has generally been thwarted. They have to point their ships at the target, get the lock, and then fire. This means they can't just toss missiles over their shoulders at people, and hope for a hit. They have to consciously make the attempt to fully engage in battle.

Let me re-emphasize: Fire-and-Forget missiles are not intended to be infalliable - just more difficult both to deploy as well as to evade. They can be dodged, and for the most part, they only need to be dodged once. Occasionally twice.

I was playing Ace Combat 4 (I finally decided to get a PS2 - Ace Combat 5 is waiting on the wings for after I finish 4) and in that game, the (normal) missiles are programmed to "die" once they've passed the target because they're unable to turn to make a second pass. But I wanted to keep the missiles somewhat within the current framework of the game, so instead, I just gave them less fuel so that they can't make more than a single pass (though I guess their range is somewhat limited to about 600m).

Yes, countermeasures could make it easier to dodge, but as I've said, I wanted to work within the existing framework of the game as much as I could - meaning no countermeasures. I really don't mind that there wouldn't be countermeasures, because then it puts the skill of the pilot at the test to recognize the missile threat and to take appropriate measures to avoid damage.

All missiles have a targeting cone, but the requirements between the missiles differ. Long range missiles require the target to remain within the targeting cone until impact. Short range "dogfighting" missiles only require the target to remain in the cone until the "lock-on" sequence is complete. At short range, it's very difficult to keep an erratically evading target in said cone for that period, but I think it'd be impossible for it to remain until impact. At long range, it's more possible, but still difficult. At those ranges, judging the time-to-impact, as well as the target's heading is important - if they start running soon enough, the missile will run out of gas before hitting.

The missiles that I'm suggesting are NOT intended to replace dogfighting. They're intended to COMPLEMENT dogfighting. Strategy and tactics will become far more important. You'll have to keep in mind what your partners are flying so you can maximize your combat effectiveness. The fast long-range missiles could be used for the approach, when currently no shots are taken. Then the short-range missiles are used to add another aspect to the furball so that it isn't just a circling gun dance. Yes, that would mean that missiles would be harder to dodge, and they'd be definitely different from they way they are now. But I think that it's for the BETTER because they'd add a completely new dimension to the dynamics of combat.

some very cool stuff here, and i can say that when i play as a trader (about 50% of the time i play) i'd find it great fun to find ways of dodging these things (especially the long range ones). Its all about the tactics and knowing what your attacker is doing. For example, if he's just let off a couple of long range missiles, you know he has to keep you in his sights until they're close enough to lock on themselves. So you let off a couple of proxmines to try to make him dodge, or even concussions to knock him completely off target. Suddenly his missiles go astray!
Great fun, and since the missiles you proposed all either have long range or poor maneuverability they won't affect dogfights (geminis have to see the tail of the opponent) much at all. Best of both worlds if you ask me, and i'd love to see this in game, even if im only on the recieving end :P

Missiles do need a fix of some kind, and i hardly think it'd take 3 months to fix these values. 3 months testing maybe, but I doubt they'd roll it out without doing a little of their own, and it'd only take the 3 months (more like 1 month but i'll use your value) to get them PERFECT. Its not like the game would be broken in the meantime, if anything that bad happened the devs would just change it and roll out again, seeing as all they have to do is change some weapon profiles...

Please devs do consider this, I personally reckon it'd be great fun.

^bump - at the urging of players online

I don't want to see current things changed. It will become and endless balancing act. The current crappy missles are just n00b weapons.

So currently we only see swarms and Gemini. THe reason is simply because thats all we really have.

More weapons should be added before we worry about balancing them. Things may not need to be balanced once we have more weapons to work with. Right now we are basing things on the small variety available to us.

I agree Daikaze, get more diversity, then worry about rebalancing, which is a never ending battle.

At the same time, ship and weapon balance should be a never-ending process. To grossly simplify chaos theory: everything affects everything else... you might tweak the course of the CtC convoy and find that screamer rockets are suddenly in higher demand. Balance should never take up too much developer time, but it should always be going on in the background.

Basically, what I'm saying is that the we-shouldn't-change-things-cuz-it-will-be-a-never-ending-balancing act argument isn't really valid... that's what balancing *should* be. There's no such thing as a perfect, static balance.

As far as diversity goes; we already have many weapon types that just don't see any use. Every weapon should have it's niche, and if a certain weapon is never used imo it should be adjusted to fill its niche by either changing its stats or its availability (license levels) before more weapons are added.

So in essence you'd rather halt productions of more content to rebalance a single weapon? Your basically taking the exact opposite stance of my earlier statement, which is also not a valid statement.

You were right when you said that they should be happening at the same time, but as you have experiences like I have, that does not seem to be happening, it's either one or the other and not both. Which was what I was trying to get across. And before someone wets themselves I am totally aware of the 4 dev factor.

Since everyone seems to agree that the game is not finished (and will never be) so why wouldn't you want to get as much content in as possible before you try to balance it all out. Tweaks as they are needed is one thing, total shifting is another, which is what everone wants most of the time. And it should never stop the production of any new content. Without the new content the vets or those who have gotten bored with current content will find entertainment elsewhere.

There are a TON of suggestions for new and interesting content, I'm sure that the devs could just work off of all of that for years. I simply wish to see new stuff not nerfed or uberized versions of what we have. It's like we keep getting a new game every week except everthing is the same, yet different, how dull is that.

Don't get me wrong, what the devs have said they are working on sounds really cool and I can not wait to see it in action, hopefully this new bot stuff will work, unlike the frigate =)

Remind me not to recommend you for helping out with promotions.

@johnhawl218:

i would be more than willing to go on record stating that i would rather halt productions on more content to rebalance a single weapon.

trying to keep up with the general population's endless appetite for novelty is a losing proposition. i'd rather see only four weapons, of which each is practically useful in combat by vets and by mere mortals, than twenty weapons, most of which are underpowered or novelty, (and of which people only use three or four anyway, because the rest are useless).

the same goes for ships.

*bump*