As it is, many higher meta guns, especially in the AC category, has no reason to exist, given t2's performance. They should either be removed from the game, or fixed.

WRONG.

They have a higher refire rate but less alpha.

You are at a point where the increase in alpha you can gain will not decrease the number of volleys it takes to destroy a ship. At that point, the higher ROF is worth every penny, because it will allow you to kill faster.

Just because EFT says something is 'better' does not make it so.

Officer guns drop rates are so low there's no way market rules can compensate for it.

More importantly, faction gun prices are determined by LP shop arbitrarily set by CCP.

You can't just call a fake mmo economy the "free market."

Sure there is. If they're that rare (they aren't), they go straight into the GG#collectorGG% segment and get the price they deserve.
No, faction prices are determined by what kind of ISK/LP people want to get out of it, and by the fact that the buyers think these conversion rates are actually reasonable. Otherwise, people wouldn't buy them, so mission-runners wouldn't generate them, so they wouldn't even exist on the market.

Regardless, the price is set by the players, and if the buyers are willing to pay whatever price an item is at, then that price is the correct one. There is pretty much only two prices that can be wrong: when the price is 0 (because the item in question is literally useless) and when the price is NULL (because the item effectively doesn't exist).
Sure you can, especially when it's as intricate as EVE's economy. That's why all comparisons with other games (cf. the previous comparison about GG#loot rulesGG%) fail: because they are entirely irrelevant to the way EVE works.

So the question remains: what is the problem here?

Until CCP removes isk trade in and npc tag buy orders, there is no free market for faction mods.

You're right on point for saying the item at that combination of price/performance point should not exist.

Yes there is, or the stuff wouldn't ever see the light of day on the market (or, alternatively, everyone and their dog would have a few thousands of them each, cluttering their hangars). Since they're there, and are being traded, people are obviously creating and buying them at prices that satisfy them, and your feelings about GGv and your definition of GGv their performance is utterly irrelevant.
GG*but since they do exist on the market, the price/performance point is where it should be. There is nothing to GG#fixGG%.

So the question still remains: what is the problem here?

Mines are also being traded in the market, even though they're non-functional. If it exists, it will be traded. That in itself proves nothing.

Our problem is mods 1/100th of the price of another outperforming it, thus breaking balance.

The fact that trade rates of many types of medium and small faction ACs are lower than mines, a nonfunctional item, illustrates this break of balance.

Yes it does: it proves that price and functionality are not connected.
What balance, and how is it broken? It rather seems like the problem here is that you assume that GG#more priceyGG% must mean GG#betterGG%. Why not fix that instead?

Why is it a problem that people choose to buy what you consider less worthy stuff for more money?
No, it illustrates that there is no point in having pricey equipment on expendable ships and that item collectors like to trade collection items.

The fact that certain faction guns are in less demand than nonfunctional mines proves it's unbalanced compared to cheaply available t2 variants.

If they're balanced, people would be using them.

Not really, no, since you're not comparing the class of items.
Collection items are not a useful point of comparison to stuff people actually use. My cheese grater offers an insanely high price/performance ratio compared to the Mona LisaGG*

So the questions remain: what balance? How is it broken? And why is it a problem that people choose to pay more for what you consider less function? What, in short, is the problem?
GG*and obviously, people are using them, so by your undisclosed definition of balance, they're fine.

Of course they're not.

Their trade volume is even less than nonfunctional mines.

Thus, they're unbalanced.

So they're a collector's item then? Then what's the problem? Are you saying that they should be even rarer so they get a proper collection price?
Irrelevant.
Non sequitur. In what way are they unbalanced?

In your words,

t2 meta 5 guns made meta 6+ faction guns collectors' items.

Thus,

they're unbalanced.

I wasn't going to post in this again but it was just killing me how off-topic this had gotten.



Ok to get this back on track from what my OP was. This post wasn't about other modules like T2 guns vs meta 13s or any T2 mod vs its meta 13 for that matter.

The original concern was about a Meta 4 mod giving a better, or the same, bonus than a T2 (Meta 5) one while the T2 mod requires far more training.

The OP wasn't about the cost of a mod at all. If people want to pay more for a module like a Meta 13 that costs 100Mil that gives a good bonus then they're more than welcome to it.

My problem is with a Meta 4 being better than a meta 5 that requires more training. I could care less about the cost of the item what I'm concerned with is the training. How exactly can a pilot use a module with 6 hours of training that's better than a module that requires 2 days or training, you see my point?

I hammered on the training time because that is my main problem. I will restate, Cost can be whatever players decide is worth it for that module, but training time is a system set by CCP and it appears they are not following that model.

I wasn't going to post in this again but it was just killing me how off-topic this had gotten.

The original concern was about a Meta 4 mod giving a better, or the same, bonus than a T2 (Meta 5) one while the T2 mod requires far more training.

The OP wasn't about the cost of a mod at all. If people want to pay more for a module like a Meta 13 that costs 100Mil that gives a good bonus then they're more than welcome to it.

My problem is with a Meta 4 being better than a meta 5 that requires more training. I could care less about the cost of the item what I'm concerned with is the training. How exactly can a pilot use a module with 6 hours of training that's better than a module that requires 2 days or training, you see my point?

I hammered on the training time because that is my main problem. I will restate, Cost can be whatever players decide is worth it for that module, but training time is a system set by CCP and it appears they are not following that model.

So, you're going to be a hypocrite, and only care about unbalancing when it affects you? Right...

I'll play Tippia then: what is the nature of the problem you've identified? More training opens up an option for a module that is widely, if not universally, available (and yes, the availability drives down the price, but that's a secondary effect). Beta SPRs drop from, what, BR and Sansha rats? Occasionally? Whereas T2s can be invented/manufactured anywhere, anytime. You're still training for convenience.

Which may not be worth much to you as an individual. Maybe you have all the Beta SPRs you'll ever need stashed away already. In which case, access to T2 SPRs is not an incentive to train EGU 4. However, it's far from the only incentive to train EGU 4; it's a core fitting skill for a reason. (We can debate whether RCU IIs are, in fact, the only real incentive to get EGU 5 another time.)

So.... You get convenience. You can skip out on training, but training is a benefit in and of itself to start with. What's the issue?

Selfish, adjective: devoted to or caring only for oneself; concerned primarily with one's own interests, benefits, welfare, etc., regardless of others.

If you will notice I've focused on the module I happened to notice and I'm not really bringing any other modules at all. So please explain to me how that is hypocrisy in your mind.

That is exactly the hypocrisy. You only want to fix imbalance when it affects you, but don't care about bigger imbalances which doesn't harm you.

Who says I don't care about them? I'm just trying to keep this thread on track with what it was originally intended to be about. I didn't intend for this thread to be an every module imbalance thread. If I wanted to talk about that I'd make a thread called that.

I do want all the imbalances fixed in the game and you have no right to tell me what I want, what I think or what I care about. To have such an attitude is pretentious, shallow and frankly, idiotic.

FYI I've been playing EvE for about a month and I don't play the game like its my profession. I don't know about all the other imbalances, changes etc. Perhaps you could have thought about that before posting?

Have you noticed that last guy citing armor plates? Have you noticed that since you weren't willing to support fixing other T2 related imbalances others cited, you've in turn gotten no support from them? T2 module performance is one big imbalance, that goes in both directions. T2 sprs are obscure enough that, unless you stop being selfish and hypocritical, no one else is going to care.

Btw, not supported. SPR's are fine. T2 versions are essentially no worse than meta 4, the slight fitting increase is insignificant.

Supporting t2 1600mm plate fix. The grid usage difference on this particular mod is much more significant.

If the answer is in turn that it costs more because it does and there is no other reason I'll accept that.

Who says I need support? I'm discussing a perceived imbalance in a game through the means of a logical discussion. I've already accepted most of the points brought forward all except one, why it costs more CPU to fit. If the answer is in turn that it costs more because it does and there is no other reason I'll accept that.

This isn't a thread meant to debate all the fitting imbalances as I've stated. If someone wants to make a thread about that they are free to do so and I'm free to state what I want my thread to be about.

Off Topic, are you a democrat/liberal?

So in summary why does the Tech 2 use more CPU than the meta 4 with no added bonus.