Ships & Modules

Ok, so are people gonna switch to assault missiles for their cruiser and battle cruisers?

Yes? And where is the tank then? Harb has to use lowslots for tracking/dps/tank. Drake has enough mids for prop, tackle and a massive tank, and all lows are free for dps mods etc.

Yeah, range comes down a tad BUT the T2 ammo is getting fixed, so no more faction only, drake has to trade damage for range for tank like everything else.....moreso now that it has YEs and TCs to consider.

That medium neut is 200 grid, cane loses 225 grid, I have to look, but I'm pretty sure it'll be 425 and no neuts, or neuts and 220s.

HML's were simply brought into line with the other medium long range weapons. It simply no longer does BS damage at BS ranges.

What an ignorant and arrogant opinion. A few comments:
- Pulse lasers have one of the highest optimals in the game for close range weapons. You can generally expect that unbonused HPL will not hit to 30km even with Scorch. It is and always has been one of the strongest kiting weapons in the game due to fantastic damage projection. Why do you feel that 45km HAMs is too short range to kite with? That's outside of even Loki boosted point range.
- There's no reason you won't be able to use HML to kite.
- You need T2 for HML far less than you need it for Artillery/Beams/Rails. The inability to use T2 LR ammo is crippling on those platforms, but not for HML.
- Minmatar are getting raped by these balancing changes. When was the last time you saw a Rifter and thought "Oh look, a good frigate!". Even the Slasher is generally bad when compared to the other options out there.

-Liang

There's nothing wrong with heavy assault missiles and I've used them personally versus after burning frigates, with a stasis webifier applied (they hurt). Seriously though. When it comes to applying damage on everything cruiser and above, you're doing full damage with heavy assault missiles. The purposed changes won't effect this if anything heavy assault missiles will become better.


However, tracking disruptors effecting missiles is a bad idea.


Unlike many in 0.0; low security space and faction warfare produce SUPERIOR frigate pilots. Faction warfare has become alot more difficult than I remember. Mainly because of wide spread proliferation of frigates using tracking disruptors (alot more compotent pilots to, but it could just be the gallente). Anyway. I've literary near stopped flying cruisers and battlecruisers altogether because every other frigate has a f*cking tracking disruptor.


These missile ships are an effective counter to that proliferation: Drake, Caracal Navy Issue, Osprey Navy Issue and the Caracal. "drone boats" are also effective, but yeah... I have come to realize how lame Tracking disruption is and I must say it's almost as lame as ECM.


Missiles shouldn't be effected by tracking disruptors and it would also compound the divergence of ECM and tracking disruption from the other forms of electronic warfare. I rather limit the application of electronic warfare modules like ECM, remote sensor Dampners and tracking disruptors. That way of thinking may hurt those modules effectiveness but, I believe it would increase the fun factor and limit the amount of complaining in this game. Leads to a happier player base which is good for CCP's wallet. basically don't give players more reasons to complain...

People said the same thing about Autocannons and Vagabonds. Turns out they were 100% right... Ohwai-----

It'll be just as true with missiles.

-Liang

The only thing I read from your post is a good argument for nerfing the base strength of TDs and that they should affect missiles in roder to level the playing field.

As for TDs why should they continue to be weak in that they can't to squat to missile boats? ECM can affect any ship and it's weapon system (even drones if they weren't released in time). Damps can affect any ship. Painters can affect any ship. The relative value of these ewars is of course not balanced since ecm is so much better since preventing a lock is better than reducing a lock range or slowing it down, or increasing the sig on a ship. So here we have Caldari, Gallente, and Minmatar ewar all universally effective (of course the worth of that effect will depend on the situation). But Amarr ewar is absolutely worthless on a whole segment of ships as things are atm. That is not balance in any sense of the word.

Yes, TDs are overused and op in small ship fw fighting. Plenty of mid-slot blessed Caldari ships abusing that mechanic to neuter turret ships. Just don't turn those ******* back on me is not a good reason to oppose CCPs coming change. If they now worry the abusers so much they'd all better get on board with asking for the base module strength for turrets and missiles to be less than it presently is for turrets.

Then when the specialized ships get a bigger ship bonus to compensate it will make them as desireable as griffins and blackbirds etc. This should be done for damps and TPs as well. And it will be a buff to the ships specialized for them. This ironically will be to the benefit of ecm boats. They might not always be the automatic primaries anymore.

As for heavy missiles, they will be fine. Even with a nerf (at whatever level it ends up being, as percentages could change) they will be far from useless. But they will no longer be a weapon for all seasons. And on the flip side other underperforming and less utilized missile types may be getting slight buffs which will result in making them worth using.

All this is good for the game. Drakes and Tengus Online had to end sometime. If I was vindictive I'd love them to be as worthless and little used as Harbingers etc. have been and that that would last for the next 4 years. But that would not be good for the game.