Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

One of the most important questions regarding missile performance, specifically larger missiles, is whether or not the Missile Guidance Enhancers/Computers have succeeded in helping these platforms.

I have some information about their adoption rates, but I personally wonder if the pilots using them are doing so for reasons other than "they are great at missile damage application" such as:

• Using them for range
• Using them to make up for Aegis stacking penalties
• Using them out of curiosity

I'm going to try to find out how these modules have affected larger ship efficacy, not just popularity of the ships or these modules.

My guess is that they haven't significantly helped larger missiles (though I won't speak for light missile boats). If that's the case, I'm afraid the net result here is missiles as a platform will be even weaker than they were pre-Aegis (when missiles were supposed to be buffed). Since it was largely agreed at the time missiles were not in a happy place (and perhaps still aren't), this scenario could be very, very sad for missile pilots.

Defender missiles are a very poor counter (that should be completely repurposed rather than tweaked) and the inability to impact missiles has always been a major problem for Amarrian Weapon Disruption ships.

At the same time, we're planning on making a slight buff pass on the Missile Guidance modules that were introduced in Aegis. Their range bonuses don't need any more improvements, but we are currently planning on buffing their explosion radius and explosion velocity bonuses by ~10%. We'd then observe how that change is received on TQ and decide if we want to go farther or not.!

You can stop all incoming damage? You must be joking... You are worried about two unbonused tracking disruptors which will be heavily impacted by the stacking penalty, and you would be wasting all of your midslots. I can't see anyone even trying to use such a doctrine.

The whole point of the Ishtar blob is that it doesn't need to concern itself with manually targeting each ship, trying to coordinate spreading the ewar in a big blob of alliance F1 monkeys for relatively little effect will not be very likely to happen.

Also you forget that CCP can balance using the tracking disruptor's modifiers, and even buff some of the weaker missile systems. So combining both effects into a tracking disruptor module does not necessarily mean that this will be unbalanced as you can tweak the other variables. I think HAM, HAML, and Torps will need buffs anyway regardless.

Oh so you mean if they completely rebalance everything around the stupid idea it'll be less stupid?

Or, you know, they could just not break everything in the first place.


And yeah, unbonused TD ARE that good. You know why they aren't prolific now? Because missiles and drones. Make it one mod and you're good to go vs everything but drones.

Even stacking, taking two unbonused mods you'll drop HML range to under 20. Or have them hit like citadel missiles.

Dual TD ishtar blobs will not be a thing of that I am very sure NPC alt.

Mid slots are highly valuable in PvP. This is part of the reason you need to implement this as a script or they will be used rarely. By making this scripted and balancing around that at least the module won't border on an interesting gimmick as the current missile enhancing module have been so far.

Also two unbonused TDs will knock a caracal down to 37km range. That is still pretty good although it is not under 20km as you are thinking. And good luck getting a blob to spread the ewar over an entire enemy fleet.

You seem to be fixated on using unbonused and suboptimal setups. What are the two main missile doctrine ships... The Caracal and Cerberus; both have velocity and flight time bonuses.

Anyway, that is enough of trying to get an angry NPC alt to see sense for one day. *chuckles*

Mgcs prenerf were retardidly broken, and still are very good, just shows how much bs ccp has to wade through in feedback theads.