I have heard that as originally implemented missiles were just fighters that killed themselves and didnt go back to ship when low on fuel.

Yep. Missiles are simply fighters with a suicide weapon. Should a missile NOT have a suicide weapon, it should return to your ship.

Umm... So you're saying a missile should fly to an enemy, shoot it, then return?

Or are you saying it should just return if there's nothing to destroy?

I don't really, yeah... They seem like weird ideas, since they're missiles.

I really hope you're trolling.

A missile without a suicide weapon already exists in game, they are called fighters.

Pretty much, there is some more differences for code reasons, but that's the main difference.

I don't see a need for missiles to return, they're missiles, not lap-dogs.

I'd be happy with some self destruct thing, but as you can see from the op, missiles will no longer take slots and have shorter lifespans, pretty much 100% negating the need for missiles to return and/or self destruction mechanism.

So if missiles don't take any slots what will happen to launchers?

Sorry for the late reply.

Our current plans are as follows, but still up for discussion (as is everything else in this rebalance at the moment!):

Remove launcher stacking. Missile launch speed will be launcher or missile dependent instead. Launchers get varying bonuses to missiles, with the rare and valuable launchers obviously having the best bonuses.

Would launchers be able to be modded then?

I disagree with the way you guys are planning because it essentially transforms Missile Launchers into shiny un-equip-able augmenters and removes all purpose of having several launchers, thereby massively flooding the market.

I propose, instead, that you make Launchers attributed to exactly one missile, apiece, and introduce missile scripting so we can set the order of missile launches. Each ship would be given a *Total Launcher Number* stat, which determines the total amount of equipped Launchers. Very few ships would deviate from the Hull Class' (LF, HF, FR, CS) default Launcher #, and almost all ships that DO deviate would be Capital Ships.

That way, you can have several ships be pure missile boats, some ships pure gun boats, and other ships hybrids of both missiles and guns.

Your initial statement is contradictory. If missile launchers were 'shiny un-equip-able augmenters', then there is LOADS of reasons to carry multiple launchers.

Additionally, our current launcher choice isn't that wide, there is a single series for each hull class except capital ship which has two, plus the Unholy Claymore. We can easily take up the slack in the market by making new launchers with bonuses on which require some of the current launchers.

Iirc the launcher idea was more like drone controllers with less options than 'un-equip-able augmenters'. Either way I wouldn't really describe them as have 'augmenter' functionality.

So, if you go in-line with the launchers have inbuilt bonuses idea, what will happen to inbuilt launchers? I would assume the Zeus's Launch Tubes would be epic seeing as it can't be removed from the ship, or is the plan to remove inbuilt launchers altogether?

I'm not sure, we have a few possible options here, we could just make them good (give various bonuses) or we could mark them shipbound instead of sticky, so you still get one with the ship and you can swap it for a different one, but can't remove it from the ship.

Then again, I'm not calling the shots here so much, just ideas that popped into my head.

There are loads of reason to have many DIFFERENT launchers, yes. But many SAME launchers, no. What did you expect was going to happen to people who have 12 Unholy Claymores now that you will make them only need one per Gunner? Seven odd years of accumulating launchers is going to unleash a biblical flood onto the market.

Upgrade them into versions that give bonuses.

Didn't I just say we could do that?