Refund everyone who bought an AA launcher

you mean, EFS with rocket pods?

Just a few moments ago, I was in a spawn room being camped by magriders. Ducking out the door occasionally with my AV lock on rockets I realized there was a magrider right there in my face. Clicked to fire before the log on had timed in, and got a nice hit.

That is using the weapon as it is intended (to attack vehicles), yet will no longer be a functionality of this weapon in the future. Instead, many of us will simply run with the stock model weapon, since we pretty much are assured that the decimator will either be nearly identical, or so OP that it too will be nerfed and not worth purchasing.

I'm perfectly fine with the damage of my AA rocket being nerfed against infantry and vehicles. I'm happy to have my AV rockets nerfed against infantry and air. That is a sensible balance arrangement. Oh sure, I'd be kinda bummed, but in a "oh well" sort of way. Removing the dumb fire mode means that for me at least, there's $14 bucks I won't be using much. (Since I have both AA and AV lock ons). With SOE's history I know that many of us have been a bit leery of tossing too much money at them (Took me over 7 years, personally, to be willing to give them money again after their last drastic alteration of services).

For me, the ideal solution is to nerf the dumb fire damage down 50% from the lock on damage, but still give us that "Oh Sh.........." moment usability of the weapon.

People keep using bad analogies and throwing out slippery slope arguments like they've ever been anything but one of the more absurd logical fallacies.

We're not upset about something like changing the recoil. That's a modification to existing functionality.

We're upset over removal of existing functionality. More specifically, we're upset over removal of functionality when no one appeared to be asking for it, without a significant boost to the weapon's effectiveness, when it already had a pretty large drawback to using it (reduced damage).

there is nothing overpowered about what was potentially lost from the orifginal design, dumbfiring a hawk is much less preferable to the starter launcher vs ground anyways. that isn't the point. the point is 70%+ of the products original design has been changed in under 2 weeks of the games' release. THAT'S NOT COOL!

This isn't about a minor change in a game preferential design, a nerf here or a tweek there. This is about bait and switch over 3 very specifically PURCHASED products that all had the same significant change in gameplay functionality. That isn't even the issue! We could be talking about an aesthetic change that completely alters an outfit or any other purchased item that is directly changed without consent of the consumer using the product.

And EVEN THEN, the bigger picture issue is the BLATANT disregard for the people that patronize their game. those !@#$ing clowns on the customer rep team need to be FIRED. They are clueless bank managers that have litttle or no consideration to the individual players enjoyment for which a GAME is designed primarily for.

Yeah, okay, I'm sure the game will direly miss someone who left because he didn't get a full refund when an aspect of the game has been changed.

Btw, SOE already got your money. You can quit any time now.

Now that I've stopped being an *******, SOE could diffuse this by giving like a free one use camo or something similar to players who were effected, it wouldn't be a full refund(Because the weapon was only partially changed) and some players my stop crying uneccessarily. I suppose you gotta make the baby stop somehow. Or maybe something small in terms of SC.

Thus is the problem with a F2P game when you're doing balance. People who buy these items(Not ENTIRELY unfairly to be honest, now that I think about it) will want a little something back.
I think a full refund is entirely out of bounds and unreasonable imho. A small gesture possibly. But I think... EULA. Shoulda read and understood it brahs.

Try the last 13 years AT LEAST with Sony's "SorryIcanthelpyou GMs in EQ. Higby plays this game himself and Higby is concerned personally with the game functionality. And that is great, thank you Higby! but don't expect applause or trust when your unable to meet your customer base half way.

Eveyone is talking about the nerf in the context of using an AA mssile against vehicles, but to be honest, I think the main reason for this is because of the amount of people using their missiles as a guaranteed one hit kill against infantry.
Recently it's become a joke the amount of heavies running around spamming missiles instead of using guns.

You really don't see the difference between a change to recoil, or damage, and a mechanical change, do you? Here I thought you were just being rhetorical, but you actually don't see it. Fair enough. Oh wait, having read your second paragraph, it appears as though perhaps you are just being rhetorical. By the way, never played COD.

On to the substance, if they would have changed damage numbers, making the HA AA pointless to shoot at tanks and infantry, I wouldn't have a problem. They did it in PS1. They pull it off with Flak here. The changes they're making do little to help HA AA, further lock on distance without travel time increase simply means the miss rate will go up, in order to use it against aircraft semi-effectively, you still have to wait until they're as close as you do now. Additionally, we're now hampered with the fact that we have to hit an equipment terminal just to dumb fire at hovering aircraft. That Reaver that's in your face shooting at you, you can't shoot back with your HA AA without lock on. Are you a pilot? Because this vigorous defense seems entirely misplaced.

Games free bro... I'll still be here with all my stuff... just won't spend any more $$$$... nice try thou
Matter of fact I've still got buku station cash to spend... no worries, I'll be here to be your content!

Heck I'll even make sure to have intellectual discussions with you endlessly brah!

Cause your ma boy blue!

Just FYI I edited that post to something slightly less trolly.

I mentioned this very thing in another thread. They could have fixed that by simply making AV and AA rockets do zero damage against footsoldiers. If pwning of foot zergers with rockets was the problem they were trying to fix, they sure chose a ham-fisted way of doing it lol.

This is completely inaccurate. Lockon launchers do about 30% less damage than the old dumb fire launcher. That was the disadvantage. So yes, I would like my credits back from purchasing this thing as I will rarely, if ever, use it any more.

Obviously we all sign a EULA that says SOE can screw us over in any way they want, but it is good customer relations to refund peoples money when they spend money on an item and then it's changed to be a substantially different item.

I dont know if you have noticed, but there are dumbfire rocket launchers and they wont be affected. actually they are adding a new dumbfire RL that does even more damage

the only thing they changed is the ability to dumbfire in the lock on rocket launchers, so people will skip them

so people will keep one hitting infantry and now also do more damage vs tanks, just air will be a lot more safe than it already was

in a nutshell

vs infantry = nothing changes, OHKOs everywhere
vs tanks = they will receive more damage because tanks are trivially easy to hit even with dumbfire
vs air = noone will bother because hitting air with a dumbfire RL is very hard, and noone will use the lock on variants


time to get your rocket pods guys, gotta play AirSide 2

Pretty sure the "problem" they wanted to fix was that the AA launcher was/is far too effective of an "all comers" weapon. Its small firing arc made it easier to aim than the dumbfire. Its damage loss was acceptable vs. the dumbfire. Its AA ability is respectable enough, and its damage vs. tanks was still as needed.

Also, it should be noted that the AV launcher is also affected by this. Which does stink as it means you have to wait for that lock to get a shot, even if you know you would hit.

Really this just means that situationally, if you don't think you need a lock, take a dumbfire. If they're too close to miss, or your a good shot, take the decimator.

That's ok Sexzeh.. I understand your angry cause I want SOE to treat their customers fairly!

Your still my boy blue!

Probably for idiots that are willing to waste money on anything that give you an edge? Am I not right? Lol at you remove damage vs infantry... Like if the core of the problem is there...

When talking balance, most people are stupid. It was said several time in Beta that the AA launcher was simply better than the normal rocket launcher. Just look at yourself and those complaining. Why did people almost instantly bough the AA launcher? Simple, it has the same function as the default rocket launcher AND the AA capability even though it is suppose to be a AA weapon. How could people not see how flawed that approach was?! Obviously, weapon/vehicule devs are incredibly slow since they haven't listen to many post in Beta and looking at this thread, so are people.

The AA launcher is now a pure AA weapon, the AV launcher is a pure AV weapon and you have the default launcher that can do pretty much anything. HA now have a choice to make rather than be anti-everything, and the normal launcher can actually be consider decent. I haven't test the new Decimator so I can't tell.

DAMN! A unspecialize default weapon that is decent and available to anyone from the start! Start the p2w argument again as well!

I agree. While it may be different from what people's expectations are after having watched videos, heard from friends, or used it in a trial, it does do exactly what it was meant to do. It just lost its other functionality. (or will).

While it is regrettable to many, it is doing what it was meant to do.

The AA missile was terrible at taking out armor and maxes. Its only virtue in that role was that it didn't make you useless to carry an G2A missile. I regret that they are taking away the dumbfire mode, but perhaps this was meant to even out "more effective G2A missiles" with "fewer G2A missiles".

Would you people just shut the **** up, get in game, and blow these ******* aircraft that are ****** me up already? They made your AA gun supper effective and forced it into a niche role. Shut up and use your super effective weapon you selfish *****! We need you in there countering those damn rocket pods!

thats like saying they could change the way scopes work. if you attach a scope to your weapon you lose hip firing...

and if you complain "well, the scope still magnifies your targets? then its still doing what it was meant to do"

now imagine the scope costed you 1000 certs/700 SC instead of 30 certs, and you will understand the problem