Devs: Please explain Ion Railgun vs. Ion Missile discrepancies

[Nemarus]

There are two Secondary Weapons in the game that are focused around ion damage. Let's compare them, fully upgraded.

 

Range

Railgun: 15000m

Missile: 7700m

 

Damage vs Shields

R: 1850

M: 1580

 

Damage vs. Hull

R: 463

M: 198

 

Accuracy

R: 98% - can be reduced by Evasion

M: N/A - lock on, can be avoided with Engine ability

 

Critical Hit Chance

R: 0% (8% if you don't take AOE, but who doesn't?)

M: 10% (for extra 50% damage)

 

Preparation

R: 2.7 seconds charge up (for max damage)

M: 2.6 seconds (plus missile flight time)

 

Cooldown

R: 1.5 seconds (GCD)

M: 11 seconds after launch

 

AOE?

R: Yes

M: No

 

Slow Debuff (Tier 5)

R: 40% for 6 seconds

M: 40% for 12 seconds

 

Regen Debuff (Tier 5)

R: 100% for 6 seconds

M: 50% for 6 seconds

 

Capacity

R: Infinite (though bound by laser energy)

M: 12 (might as well be Infinite given the cooldown)

 

Energy Drain

R: ~50 engine AND weapon per shot, regardless of charge (minimum 25%)

M: unknown, but let's give the devs the benefit of the doubt and assume ~55 after Tier 3 upgrade

 

One would think, seeing as how these are both Secondary Weapon components, that they should have relative parity. That intent is clearest when looking at their two Tier 5 upgrade options. Both have a slow and a regen blocker. Oddly, the Missile's slow is double the duration of the Railgun's slow, but the Railgun's regen-blocker is twice as powerful as the Missile's. This is a bit strange, as it seems to indicate that (given equal intended "effectiveness" of both weapon's final tiers), the devs deliberately decided to make the Missile's Slow the better choice between the two upgrades, while the Railgun's regen blocker is the better choice.

 

But let's put that aside for now.

 

The Ion Railgun does 17% more damage to shields than the Ion Missile, and 133% more damage to hull! Granted, one would not expect to use Ion weapons to damage hull, but it is strange that this disparity is so extreme between two weapons which should be approximately equal. Especially since currently, the only ship capable of carrying an Ion Railgun can also carry a Slug or Plasma Railgun for dealing hull damage, while 2.7 will introduce two new ships who--if they equip Ion Missile--have no Secondary Weapon capable of doing significant hull damage. Thus one might expect the Ion Missile to be the more generalist weapon (doing less shield damage than the Ion Railgun, but more hull damage). But oddly that's not the case.

 

The two weapons have approximately the same preparation time, ~2.6 seconds. Of course, unlike the Railgun, which can strike a target without warning, the target of the Ion Missile is aware he is being locked onto for both the 2.6 seconds and whatever time it takes the missile to reach its target. During that time, the target can use an engine ability to evade. And if the Ion Missile is fired and then evaded, another lock-on attempt cannot be attempted for 11 seconds! The Ion Railgun has no such throttling. It can be fired again and again, so long as the Gunship has the laser energy ... and currently most Gunships don't have trouble with laser energy management. And if the Gunship isn't worried about maximizing shield damage as much as it is about applying its debuff, it can fire at 25% charge every 2.2 seconds (and most of that isvglobal cooldown). The Ion Missile has no such flexibility.

 

I would call out that the Ion Missile has a limited capacity, while the Ion Railgun does not ... but honestly, with an 11 second cooldown and 2.6 second lock-on time, I doubt few people will ever run out of Ion Missiles in practice. Still, it is interesting to call out.

 

Strangest of all is that the Ion Railgun has an AOE upgrade while the Ion Missile does not. If either weapon is to have an AOE, you'd expect it to be the explosive missile, not the direct-fire railgun shot.

 

I'm not trying to make a case that the Ion Railgun is, by itself, overpowered. All I would like explained is why the Ion Railgun seems to have so many perks (higher damage, preparation flexibility, no cooldown, no warning to targets, unlimited capacity, AOE) compared to its closest Secondary Weapon cousin, the Ion Missile. While the weapons should not be identical, it definitely feels (to me) like they should be far closer in terms of balance of pros, cons and overall effectiveness.

 

One might say that railguns should be inherently more powerful than missiles because of the requirement that a Gunship needs to be stationary to fire. However, I would argue that medium- and long-lock missile weapons (including the Ion Missile) require the firing ship to remain on a pretty linear course as they achieve lock, which makes them nearly as vulnerable to enemy fire as a stationary Gunship--especially since they have to be within 7700m of their target, not 15000m.

 

Perhaps the Ion Missile needs a buff to move it closer to Ion Railgun ... though that might mean it overtakes other Missiles in effectiveness ... in which case the devs should consider the overall balance of all Secondary Weapons.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Nemarus

[Kuciwalker]

One would think, seeing as how these are both Secondary Weapon components, that they should have relative parity.

 

No, you wouldn't, because despite the appellation "secondary weapon" the railguns are very clearly the primary weapon of the gunship, with regular blasters filling a supplemental, secondary role.

[Nemarus]

No, you wouldn't, because despite the appellation "secondary weapon" the railguns are very clearly the primary weapon of the gunship, with regular blasters filling a supplemental, secondary role.

 

So Comet Breaker's Proton Torpedoes are better than a Pike's?

 

Or a Flashfire's Burst Laser Cannons are better than a Quarrel's?

 

That's essentially what you are saying.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Nemarus

[Kuciwalker]

So Comet Breaker's Proton Torpedoes are better than a Pike's?

 

The Comet Breaker is just a terrible ship tat people shouldn't fly, largely because it trades a railgun for a missile.

 

Or a Flashfire's Burst Laser Cannons are better than a Quarrel's?

 

Yes, actually, they are! A Flashfire gets far more value out of BLC because a Flashfire is in range to use it much more often and the Flashfire is better equipped to operate at those ranges.

 

That's essentially what you are saying.

 

I'm saying that it's ridiculous to expect a missile - a weapon expected to supplement the primary offensive weapons on a strike fighter, its blasters - to be equal in power to a railgun, which is the raison d'etre of the Quarrel.

 

If we subscribed to your idea, then we would expect that simply trading both of the Quarrel's railguns for missiles (i.e. essentially giving it the same weapons loadout as the Pike) ought to produce an equally balanced ship. And yet it clearly wouldn't and shouldn't, because the base stats of the Quarrel are inferior to the Pike's, in compensation for the range and power of the Quarrel's primary armament.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Kuciwalker

[Nemarus]

So you think the Ion Cannon (which is a Primary Weapon) is equal in power, utility and effectiveness to the Ion Railgun?

 

Or more to the point, you think the Ion Missile is worth using ... ever?

[Kuciwalker]

So you think the Ion Cannon (which is a Primary Weapon) is equal in power, utility and effectiveness to the Ion Railgun?

 

Probably not, because the strike fighter has a much better chassis than the gunship, and additionally the ion cannon itself is a special case among "primary weapons" in that it is intended to supplement a regular blaster.

[Altheran]

Nemarus, you have downloaded the PTS, right ? Can you check Ion Missile's hull damage there ?

 

Dulfy indicates higher 790 on their builder, and that looks like nothing Ion Missile does on live.

In addition, it has been spotted that the value of Thermite on Dulfy (1150) which also doesn't match live values is actually Thermite's new shield damage on PTS. So I suspect Ion Missile will now deal 790 hull damage, but I can't verify it.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Altheran

[Nemarus]

Nemarus, you have downloaded the PTS, right ? Can you check Ion Missile's hull damage there ?

 

Dulfy indicates higher 790 on their builder, and that looks like nothing Ion Missile does on live.

In addition, it has been spotted that the value of Thermite on Dulfy (1150) which also doesn't match live values is actually Thermite's new shield damage on PTS. So I suspect Ion Missile will now deal 790 hull damage, but I can't verify it.

 

At work at the moment. I'll patch PTS when I get a chance

 

That would definitely help matters--still, I do think an ionizing AOE fits the missile better than a railgun

[Altheran]

That would definitely help matters--still, I do think an ionizing AOE fits the missile better than a railgun

 

True.

[Armonddd]

The argument Verain has made for a while, and the argument I now subscribe to, is that a railgun should be approximately equal in power to blasters combined with missiles. After all, when a gunship shoots, he's shooting just a railgun; when a strike or scout shoots, he's firing blasters while locking on with missiles at the same time.

 

Unfortunately, the extreme burst and range provided by railguns, along for their disregard for line of sight until the shot is actually fired, throws this off a fair amount.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Probably not, because the strike fighter has a much better chassis than the gunship, and additionally the ion cannon itself is a special case among "primary weapons" in that it is intended to supplement a regular blaster.

 

well isn't that kinda the idea with all ion weapons? Namely that they're intended to supplement the regular hull damaging weapons equipped by the ship class. I can't use ion cannons as a standalone primary weapon and they have to be used in a supplementary role, they're too weak to effectively be used for any other purpose. Except for the sole purpose of stripping shields they will be weaker than even my secondaries. So by that logic ion railguns should also fall into that special case of primary weapons that are too weak to do more than supplement normal primaries.

 

At any rate I don't get why the missile has a 50% regen slow when the railgun gets a 100% slow. It seems to me it should be reversed since the missile gets no follow up shot if it is evaded whereas a gunship can have a near immediate follow up in the event that they somehow miss.

 

Also I think missing is that, if the ion missile drains about 50% power, it will not be able to drain all your power due to the 11 second reload. Even with the 50% regen slow an affected target will be able to regen at the normal rate for 5-6 seconds before the missile has finished reloading. So it's entirely possible that, if you survive those 6 seconds of slowed regen, you'd be able to get back to full power before another missile hits. Which is in contrast to the railgun that can fire two shots to drain all of your power before the first 6 second slicer's loop has worn off and effectively keep them without power until a killing blow is managed.

 

Overall I agree with Nemarus, there is a glaring difference between ion missiles and railguns in terms of power and the impact their effects will have. Even with the lessened shield damage a raingun would still be able to get off more full charge shield damaging shots before two ion missiles could be launched. And losing the 100% regen stunlock would go a long way towards making ion railguns balanced.

 

The argument Verain has made for a while, and the argument I now subscribe to, is that a railgun should be approximately equal in power to blasters combined with missiles. After all, when a gunship shoots, he's shooting just a railgun; when a strike or scout shoots, he's firing blasters while locking on with missiles at the same time.

 

Unfortunately, the extreme burst and range provided by railguns, along for their disregard for line of sight until the shot is actually fired, throws this off a fair amount.

 

I would overall agree with that when discussing slugs and plasmas. But I think ion railguns are a unique case since they perform beyond what a striker or scout could achieve with blaster/missile combined dps. Namely the stunlock. I get that you need some stunlock to keep a target from easily escaping while you switch weapons but it shouldn't be something that makes escape almost impossible since that's not even an ability that a Pike can achieve with ion missiles (even if an ion missile drains 100% of your power it can't stunlock you from regenning any power so you'd still have a slim chance to escape).

 

If we go with the idea that railguns are primaries they completely outperform ion cannons (the closest equivelant primary) since a Star Guard has no ability to use ion cannons to drain all enemy power and stunlock them. So it's entirely possible again to flee ion cannons. (keeping in mind that they won't drain enough power to prevent the use of engine abilities so an enemy can at the very least evade the missile, if not escape using barrel roll, and the inability to halt or slow regen means that, depending on shield type, they might be able to get some shields back during the delay to switch weapons).

 

The ability of ion railguns to ensure an enemy can't escape while they switch weapons seems to be in distinct contrast to all other ion weaponry that leaves an enemy with enough power to attempt an escape.

Edited March 24, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[FridgeLM]

I'm saying that it's ridiculous to expect a missile - a weapon expected to supplement the primary offensive weapons on a strike fighter, its blasters - to be equal in power to a railgun, which is the raison d'etre of the Quarrel.

 

I do not in any sense subscribe to the notion that my Quell's primary weapons are its quad laser cannons.

 

The entire reason to to fly a Quell is to abuse lock-on missiles to the fullest extent you can, not to shoot people with lasers. If you want to shoot people with lasers, fly a battle scout. The primary weapons on a Quell are its missiles.

[Kuciwalker]

Incidentally, the dps of ion cannons is dramatically higher than the DPS of ion railgun - cannons have almost 3x the dps of railguns.

[Armonddd]

I do not in any sense subscribe to the notion that my Quell's primary weapons are its quad laser cannons.

 

The entire reason to to fly a Quell is to abuse lock-on missiles to the fullest extent you can, not to shoot people with lasers. If you want to shoot people with lasers, fly a battle scout. The primary weapons on a Quell are its missiles.

 

That's true, but you can still hit things with quads while charging your missile.

[Nemarus]

Incidentally, the dps of ion cannons is dramatically higher than the DPS of ion railgun - cannons have almost 3x the dps of railguns.

 

And less than one third the range. And no AOE. And a fraction of the energy drain, even when normalized for damage per second. And no debuffs.

 

Come on.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

Incidentally, the dps of ion cannons is dramatically higher than the DPS of ion railgun - cannons have almost 3x the dps of railguns.

 

granted but I very much doubt that you'd reach more than 50% drain of your enemy's power before you've torn away their shields. Regardless you wouldn't be able to stunlock an enemy from regening their power leaving them no means of escape or ability to fight back. An enemy who lost their shields to ion cannons can still turn and fight or flee, the same can't be said for a victim of ion railguns.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Zoom_VI]

Incidentally, the dps of ion cannons is dramatically higher than the DPS of ion railgun - cannons have almost 3x the dps of railguns.

 

and light laser cannons also have the highest tooltip dps, yet they are probably one of the worst choices for a primary.

damage per shot >>>>>>dps

[Altheran]

and light laser cannons also have the highest tooltip dps, yet they are probably one of the worst choices for a primary.

damage per shot >>>>>>dps

 

But Ion Cannon is still the best weapon when it comes to destroy shield fast, because unlike light laser, the difference isn't marginal. Ion Cannon do in 1.5s what other Ion weapons do in 3s.

[Verain]

Irrelevant.

 

 

Railguns are not missiles, are not meant to be missiles. The devs aren't going to come in here and explain that because there's just no way to explain it without sounding a little condescending.

 

Before I get into this- ion railguns are, I believe, too strong. I think that they need either a mild nerf, or a moderate redesign.

 

 

But there is no way- ever- that they will become as weak as ion missiles. As has been explained, missiles and railguns are entirely seperate. You can confirm this by noting that your strike fighter has no railgun options. If it did, it would be far too good. Why is this? Railguns are intended to be the "best" from a range and burst perspective (and the worst from a dps perspective). Here are some differences:

 

Railguns:

>Only allowed on the second weakest, second slowest, second least maneuverable platform in the game, which exists to highlight the railgun.

>Requires stationary

>Requires charge

>Charge uses blaster pool

>Shot subject to evasion

 

Missiles:

>Missiles allowed on platforms with much more maneuverability, speed, hull, and shield.

>Can be flying

>Plays lock tone

>Can be broken with lock break

>Secondary missile can be fired while using primaries, can be fired while energy drained to nothing.

 

 

These are very different things. There is no railgun that it as generally weak as a missile, with the mild exception of the long lock on torps- which I would still argue are worse on average, even if you can't get proton damage to hull. If there WAS a railgun that had the proton features, rest assured it would be slightly stronger than the torp.

 

 

 

Slug railgun does 1600 damage and has very strong shield piercing and crit. Plasma does like 1800 and has crit. Every railgun kicks the snot out of missiles- by design.

 

 

That doesn't mean that they should win by *as much* though. The engine component nerf is a great buff to missiles, and will really up their ability to deal damage.

[Gavin_Kelvar]

But Ion Cannon is still the best weapon when it comes to destroy shield fast, because unlike light laser, the difference isn't marginal. Ion Cannon do in 1.5s what other Ion weapons do in 3s.

 

the one difference though is other ion weapons have the potential to either partially or completely stunlock an opponent.

 

Which is not to say that ion cannons are weak and worthless, they're quite good when you want to strip someone's shields. And with missiles I understand the stunlock feature since they have no option for a follow up. But compared to railguns it's a noticeable difference since they can leave you utterly helpless whereas against ion cannons you always have the option to flee or fight.

 

Again to some degree I get the need to stunlock an enemy while you switch and charge weapons, but it seems a bit much to be able to render them almost completely helpless and in essence a free kill.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Gavin_Kelvar

[Verain]

That's more "ion railguns are overpowered". Which, I mean, they are. But there's a lot of people saying that. It has nothing to do with ion missiles. Edited March 25, 2014 by Verain

[Pilgrim_Grey]

Frankly, the new ion missiles look more like a balance baseline that ion railgun should follow than anything (the debuff numbers etc.). Not sure if the devs are actually trying to balance missiles around railguns or not. I have a hard time telling what they're trying to do, to be honest.

[Verain]

I see nothing in common with railguns and missiles. This exact compare has actually come up before- it's just another way of complaining that ion railguns are overtuned. Well, they are. But it has nothing to do with the mostly unrelated missile.

[jtrick]

At the moment, with it being so easy for everyone to break locks the ion missile is weak with its 11s reload, but come the next patch it may start to see some use.

[Kuciwalker]

and light laser cannons also have the highest tooltip dps, yet they are probably one of the worst choices for a primary.

damage per shot >>>>>>dps

 

The ion cannon has a huge damage per shot and an even higher rate of fire. If one of your shots lands the second is likely to also just because of the ROF. The ion cannon really is the best weapon for stripping shields.