Ships & Modules

You are a troll.

Prior to the latest T2 "ammo" balance both ship and turret T2 ammo had two different types of "penalites"

The first "penalty" had to do with the performance of the ammo itself. Either a reduction in range, tracking or increased capacitor costs over the T1 variant. These remain in effect for both missiles and turrets. Just like the above examples T2 missiles have similar penalties for range and "tracking".

The second "penalty" was a drawback that had nothing to do with the ammo itself. It penalized the performance of the ship just because the ammo was loaded. They included, reduced agility or speed, signature bloom, reduced capacitor recharge.

CCP removed these drawbacks from most if not all T2 TURRET ammo and left them intack for all T2 missiles.

OP has a valid point, and you are .....well just being you.

They were made but hardly disputed. I read the thread a was only prompted to respond when i saw the obvious lack of logic in your post.

Fact remains that CCP removed SHIP drawbacks from T2 turret ammo and left them for missiles. This is a balance issue and nowhere in this thread has that been addressed least of all by you.



Obviously you have not done your homework. This is my main and since it's been so since 2007 i think i am hardly disposable. I Trust most players who read this forum can tell the validity of an argument despite who makes it.

If you are not attempting to troll i offer you my apology and suggest you take some classes in reading comprehension as you missed the OP's point completely.

By that logic, non-T2 missiles are overpowered. You don't really believe that... right? There is no reason not to remove these stupid penalties and make T2 missiles as useful as Barrage and Scorch.

Currently they are a cruel joke.

Yeah missiles as a weapon system is totally overpowered and turrets suck. That's why PvP is nothing but missile boats, right?

P.S T2 missiles vs T2 ammo wasn't balanced when they decided to remove the penalties from the ammo, so what makes you think it is automatically balanced now? Numbnut.

Ah now we get to the core of the issue - your gripe with Heavies. Funny thing about that is... Torpedoes/Cruise Missiles are not nearly as effective, made even worse by the fact that the T2 versions are nigh-useless. Maybe you should go post in a thread about Heavies alone and not in a thread about Missiles in general.

kthbai

Removing the ship penalties from T2 missiles will hardly make them overpowered; you still have the penalties applied to the missiles themselves. If you're worried about Heavies, that is a wholly different issue altogether.

@ OP

You would do well at this point to ignore the trolling. Your point is valid. I made this exact argument during the so-called T2 ammo balance.

I finally got one dev to respond to my question of why the penalties were not removed. His response suggested that the popularity of T2 missiles suggests that no further balancing was needed at this time. In essence, the fact that people buy T2 missiles as much as they did at the time of the balance and significantly fewer bought T2 turret ammo was a driving reason for the decision to leave missiles as is.

I have searched for the actual post but have not found it yet. But i think the reasoning was not sound when you take into account the high amount of T2 missiles that are used in PVE deciding they sell too well to be re-balanced seems a bit.......

Edit: found the post: #101

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1421235&page=4#101




Later in that thread i stated:

" I would like to point out that by not addressing the issue at this time you may be simply providing fuel for a future imbalance discussion."

Now we have people saying that they do not care how things were balanced months or year ago. Guess I was right.

Doesn't that post pretty much go against everything for which you're now arguing?
For those who can't be arsed to read the other thread:

CCP chronotis basically said the same damn thing I've been saying; when the original turret t2 ammo changes went through. T2 missile ammo is still good despite its drawbacks, so said drawbacks don't need to be removed.

No he said nothing like you are saying.

He said the T2 missile were being used and had a use at the time. The T2 ammo blog was released 2010.11.26 during the start of the upsurge of the use of missiles in PVP. Therefore who do you think was buying so many T2 missiles? Mission runners.

Raven variants and Drakes were at that time among the most used ships for missions and T2 heavy and cruise missiles had a use once they were buffed a few years before and the capacitor nerf was swapped for a signature bloom penalty as the ships that used them were already fit to have the signature of a small moon. So of course they were used quite a lot and still are in PVE.

His metric for determining usage took into account the overwhelming use of the missiles despite their penalties. The fallacy in that is it does not account for the vastamount of purchases that were intended for PVE.. I think even you, Mr. Battleclinic man, would agree balancing decisions should not be made based on PVE performance.

Next time you take off in an interceptor and try to tackle something bigger than you pick a crow or a vengance and fit it with T2 rocket launchers. Now once you start your approach consider adding rage or javelin rockets. The first will balloon your signature, the second will slow you down.

Then ask your self, "Why does this not happen in ANY other interceptor?" When you have done this come back and tell us how balanced this is mmmkay?


Edit:

A more eloquent balancing solution would be to remove all "ship based" penalties from T2 missiles. {FULL STOP}

Then, if you still think T2 missiles are too good and out balance tinker withe their range, explosion velocity or explosion radius. Keeping punishing ship based penalties on one class of weapon system is not balanced and nothing you have said refutes that.

The core behind my whole argument is that t2 torps are still useful despite their drawbacks, and that because of this any removal of their drawbacks would make them overpowered,(or else the difference in performance would be so small as to not be worth doing at all, though I've not mentioned that as of yet, though that depends on what sort of drawbacks get removed)

Apparently expecting even SOME sort of visible pvp experience be brought to the table by someone arguing game balance makes me "Mr. Battleclinic"


Because other interceptors can have their guns shut off with neuts and/or TDs.