--- As a fighter centric player I vehemently disagree with box launchers being the same size as 30% launchers. Unless a Fighter Only Box Launcher was implemented.
If both changes are taken together, box launchers remain the same net size for 4-MSP missiles and become actually a bit smaller for larger missiles. Fighter-centric doctrines come out quite nicely here.
--- That said I would prefer that Box Launchers simply used the linear scaling rather that the square root scaling.
I thought about this but it means that beyond some size mark box launchers are bigger than reloadable (30% size) launchers which is not very sensible.
Ah, I think I see where we've talked past each other.
Yes, I expected there would be some points I did not write very well, hence wanting discussion to clarify the ideas.
Assuming launchers' minimum mass is equal to minimum mass, then the 'reduced size' launchers would also have the same mass as the standard size launcher. This was the issue I was trying to point out.
This makes sense now. I'm not sure what to do about this, but I do know that the 30% size only meets the missile size at 36 MSP, which is such a large an impractical size that I'm not sure it's worth worrying about at least for game balance.
Here's a plot of the proposed box launcher sizes (assuming I've understood nuclearslurpee correctly): https://i.imgur.com/kFAnjwL.png
This looks correct and your analysis is spot-on.
Interesting proposal. My first impression is that it is probably a good idea. I think I have already unconsciously accepted the underlying premise of the proposal based on the fact that I have gravitated toward beam-only fleets with the exception of box-launcher-armed small craft.
I have similar experience which motivates this idea. If I ever use missiles on large ships now I use only 30% size or box launchers purely for salvo size reasons, and the 30% size always disappoints me because after magazine space is accounted for I can only generate ~1/3 or 1/4 the salvo size of box launchers. This was what led me to think about messing with launcher size scaling, to get reloadable launchers closer to box launchers (though of course box launchers are the kings for single-salvo sizes). After that I spent probably too much time trying to sort out the practical game-balance issues.
First though, I've created a table based on my understanding of the above to just check this is what you mean in terms of size. Cost for box launchers, as proposed, would be half the cost of the 30% launcher.
The tables on the right show how many launchers you could fit in 12 HS (600 tons) based on current and proposed mechanics.
This looks right to me! I will note that the "number of launchers in 12 HS" do not include the effect of additional magazine space, which along with the lower cost is what would make box launchers able to general larger salvo sizes than 30% size reloadable launchers.
Also, if you extend your tables out you'll see that the 30% size launchers have the same size as the missiles they fire, so this is where a switch to linear scaling is needed. Also at size 64 for the 40% size launchers the same phenomenon occurs. Otherwise there are no issues for MSP < 99 which is the current in-game limit.
As a side note about game balance, NPRs may have some difficulty with point defense in some cases as they do not use "sensor nets" of small craft/fighters to extend their effective AMM range, which is one of the key counters currently against box launchers (for player races). This means some testing will be needed to make sure NPRs are not too badly hurt by this change, although conversely they can take advantage of the smaller launchers to present a similar challenge to unprepared player races.
I may misunderstand something in game mechanics, but if box launcher is no different from 30% launcher except it cant be reloaded, somewhat cheaper and is prone to explosions, it makes box launchers not really worth it unless you field missile-heavy fleets and simultaneously face resource shortage. Also it may harm significantly missile fighters gameplay.
The key difference is that reloadable launchers require magazines. If you don't use magazines, then of course you want the box launchers which are cheaper. If you do use magazines, then the number of missiles you can launch from the same size of ship/fleet is reduced as each magazine takes away tonnage that could otherwise be a launcher.
(And if players find 50% cheaper is not good enough for some reason, we can always change it, but 50% cheaper keeps the cost in line with what box launchers cost currently.)
As has been discussed in the thread, missile fighters will generally benefit from these changes. Only small missiles (MSP < 4) are negatively affected and relatively few players use these small sizes on fighters. Missiles larger than 4 MSP can actually be mounted more densely on fighters with this proposal.
