Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 18:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
Introduction Yes, it's this time of the year again. I'm sure this suggestion has come up a few times already but from what I saw, the suggestions are either six years old (1, 2) or not very elaborated (1, 2). Now with CCP Fozzie and CCP Rise working on spaceships, this may be a good time to think about it with a fresh start.
The proposal I'm proposing variants of a new module (+rig) for an auxiliary drone bay (aptly named so) together with a change on the Drone Link Augmentor (and a new rig), to increase the drone bay size and drone bandwidth. This would work on any ship - if it has drones already or not - but would come with a lot of drawbacks to keep it balanced.
At first, I thought about making one module that offers both: Drone Bay and Bandwidth. But I've come to the conclusion that this may be overpowered and lead to many fits just having a small drone bay added, because it doesn't hurt.
So I came up with the split approach of having a low slot module (+rig) for the drone bay and a high slot module (+rig) for the bandwidth. The high slot module is the existing Drone Link Augmentor - unchanged except for the added bandwidth. Bandwidth is the main balancing consideration I found, so I tried not to throw around a lot of it.
The drawbacks are derived from existing modules and rigs with similar functions, such as existing cargo and drone rigs and modules.
The stats - Drone Bay Size
New module: Auxiliary Drone Bay I Increases a ships drone bay size or adds a drone bay to a ship which does not have a drone bay. Note: Your ship may also need increased drone bandwidth to operate the drones.
+10 Drone Bay Size -10% Speed -12.5% Structure HP Requires a low power slot
New module: Auxiliary Drone Bay II +17.5 Drone Bay Size -5% Speed -5% Structure HP Requires a low power slot
New modules: Meta 1 - 4 Auxiliary Drone Bays Have various size bonuses between 10 and 17.5 and various speed and structure maluses in between.
New rig: Drone Bay Optimization I +10 Drone Bay Size -10% Armor
New rig: Drone Bay Optimization II +15 Drone Bay Size -10% Armor
The stats - Bandwidth
Module change: Drone Link Augmentor I +7.5 Drone Bandwidth Unchanged: +20km Drone Control Range 50 CPU 1 PG Requires a high power slot
Module change: Drone Link Augmentor II +10 Drone Bandwidth Unchanged: +24km Drone Control Range 55 CPU 1 PG Requires a high power slot
Module change: Black Eagle Drone Link Augmentor (Storyline module; goes for 200m isk) +15 Drone Control Bandwidth Unchanged: +26km Drone Control Range 45 CPU 1 PG Requires a high power slot
New rig: Drone Bandwidth Augmentor I +7.5 Drone Bandwidth -10% CPU
New rig: Drone Bandwidth Augmentor II +10 Drone Bandwidth -10% CPU
I think these changes can add more variety to all kinds of fittings - comedy fittings or genuine new approaches - without making them overpowered. You won't just turn a ship without a drone bay into a heavy drone boat and you won't be able to pimp a drone boat without seriously affecting your tank or other aspects of the fit. For more details on that, check the next post.
Keep in mind, that the drone limit of 5 still applies, even if you can get more than 125 bandwidth.
|
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 18:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
As said before, fitting those modules will not turn any ship into a heavy drone boat without serious drawbacks. I have thought about different ships and fittings to see how things could turn out. Here are some examples:
Dominix, Ishtar, Vexor Navy Issue - you don't really gain anything, except some more space to resupply drones.
Vexor - 3 T2 rigs and 2 T2 highs would allow the Vexor to field 5 heavy drones. Alternatively 3 T1 rigs and 4 T1 modules would do the same (at 200 CPU cost and a CPU malus).
Taranis - A Taranis could go for a full flight of small drones by fitting a low slot and two high slots, or a low slot and two rigs. Add a Drone Damage Amplifier and you may have a new drone fit that's actually useful.
Wolf - With two low slots and two T2 rigs it could field 4 small drones.
Ishkur, Worm - An Ishkur or Worm could field 5 medium drones by using two rigs and a high slot.
Drake - A drake would need two low slots in addition to tree rigs (or two rigs and a high slot), to be able to field unbonussed medium drones.
Stabber Fleet Issue - An SFI could add a T1 low slot module and a T2 rig to get another medium drone, to make it 5.
Cynabal - 5 heavy drones on a Cynabal? Just sacrifice 3 rigs, at least 4 highs and 5 lows for it ... or better don't.
Prophecy - A prophecy could control 5 heavies or sentries, by fitting 3 T2 rigs and two T2 high slot modules. Alternatively it could use the rigs for tank and fit 4 (storyline) or 5 highs (at high CPU cost).
Raven - You could turn a Raven into a 5x heavy drone boat, but you would have to use 3 low slots, 3 rigs and 4 or more high slots. Those rigs need to be T2, or you have to fit Storyline mods in the high slots. So, it would be quite expensive and still you'd be worse than a Dominx, without the extra drone space and damage bonus. A less drastical change could be to add two low slot modules for some medium drones and a flight of salvage drones.
Megathron - Similar to the Raven, you'd need 3 low slots but "only" 3 rigs and two high slots.
Gnosis - To be honest, I had this ship in mind when I first thought about the changes. It would simply rock as a heavy drone or sentry boat. Like the Raven it would have to fit 3 lows, 3 rigs and at least 4 highs but it comes with a 50% drone damage bonus. I guess this is the only real balancing issue, but it's more a matter of lowering the ridiculously high drone damage bonus of that ship.
Guardian-Vexor - Undock it and bring it on!
I think it's clear where I'm getting at: Some small and medium drone ships could benefit greatly from this while the dedicated big drone ships don't get buffed. Other ships with small or no drone bays could mix in some drones, but will never be as powerfull as a dedicated drone boat. In total, it will bring more variety to fittings.
I am aware that there is an ongoing discussion about sentry drones and drone assist mechanics, so this may seem like a bad time to cry for moar drones, but I think those issues need to be addressed seperately (at the same time?). |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 19:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
reserved |
Maldiro Selkurk
CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS type X
100
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 19:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really. |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 19:49:00 -
[5] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. I understand your point, but I think the balancing comes with the modules and rigs: CPU limitation, speed, structure, armor and the many slots required to fit these things should take care of the balancing. Also, a drone bay and some bandwidth alone don't make a good drone ship. You'll also want damage amps etc. |
Drake Doe
Flatulaction
299
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 20:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Why is there no shield penalty despite a faction being completely based off drones and shield tanking? "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
2347
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 20:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Make it rigs that add 25/50/125 drone bay and another set for 5/10/25 bandwidth and it's going to work. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 20:38:00 -
[8] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:Why is there no shield penalty despite a faction being completely based off drones and shield tanking? Good point. The Guristas may have an advantage here. The reason for the penalties are: I wanted them to be in line with existing penalties:
Drone rigs: CPU penalty Cargo rigs: Armor penalty Drone Link Aug: CPU requirement Expanded cargohold: Speed and structure penalties (also drone boats usually have lower speeds)
If you check the Guristas, you'll see that it is only a single ship that is not affected by an armor penalty: The Worm.
The other two Guristas ships, the Gila and the Rattlesnake, already have a 400m-¦ drone bay and 125 bandwidth, so fitting any of the proposed modules or rigs on them wouldn't make much of a difference. |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 20:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Make it rigs that add 25/50/125 drone bay and another set for 5/10/25 bandwidth and it's going to work. Abrazzar, as you can see in the second post. I have thought quite a bit about existing ships and fittings. The numbers you propose here seem way too high for the balancing, in my opinion. Big drone bays may still work, but adding high amounts of bandwidth to just any ship will break a lot of things, I guess.
Maybe I was too cautious with my numbers, but if this ever goes life, it will be a big change.
Thank you all for your input, btw.
|
NearNihil
Every time is Fuwa time
94
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 21:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
When I saw the thread title I thought "Finally the Zealot can have at least token defence against frigates!".
Then I read the post. Left disappointed. |
|
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 21:51:00 -
[11] - Quote
:) Well, with two rigs and two low slots you can have frig defense. Final numbers would be up to the CCP experts anyway, so maybe you're lucky and get a better deal from them. |
Obsidiana
White-Noise
230
|
Posted - 2013.12.07 22:12:00 -
[12] - Quote
If not this, then something. You should be able to modify drone usage.
This was a bit tl;dr, but I got the gist of it. I would like to see something that traded bandwidth for space or vice versa. I think losing/using a hard-point would be worth it too. That would build balancing in.
My point is this: you can balance a change like this very easily. I mean, hey, lets just slap longer reload time on it. :P |
Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals Market and Contract PVP
215
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 13:35:00 -
[13] - Quote
I like this. I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack. |
Hopelesshobo
Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade
166
|
Posted - 2013.12.08 23:20:00 -
[14] - Quote
For balancing purposes, the design to increase the size of the drone bay should be percentage based instead of a flat rate. This would prevent the rig or module from becoming say overpowered for a maruader to fit, but underwhelming for a vexor. I would see this module being more in line as a rig with drawbacks instead of a module.
For the increase in drone bandwidth I can see this falling in line as a percentage base as well so it scales the same with the current balance of the game. I can also see this as being a lowslot module because it modifies the potential damage you can output.
The other good aspect of changing the drone modifications as described in the OP to percentage based instead of a linear, is we will not see dreads and T3 battlecruisers with drones, and we will see a minimal affect on changing the balance of various ships. Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 00:42:00 -
[15] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. This is eve, if i want to add a drone bay, i damn well wish too, good lord i love this game, but everything is so damn static, all the same ships, look all the same and there is no "personal" touch. |
Karma Codolle
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
50
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:54:00 -
[16] - Quote
killer persian wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. This is eve, if i want to add a drone bay, i damn well wish too, good lord i love this game, but everything is so damn static, all the same ships, look all the same and there is no "personal" touch.
If you want more of a personal touch stop fitting based on guides or get a t3 |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. Why does EVERYTHING have to be balanced? |
Jake Sake
Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra
19
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
When I saw the topic I've read it Ancillary Drone Bay |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:42:00 -
[19] - Quote
Karma Codolle wrote:killer persian wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. This is eve, if i want to add a drone bay, i damn well wish too, good lord i love this game, but everything is so damn static, all the same ships, look all the same and there is no "personal" touch. If you want more of a personal touch stop fitting based on guides or get a t3
What if I don't want a tech 3? Is that the best you've got? Just one ship out of hundreds? Thank you. |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
323
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 21:31:00 -
[20] - Quote
Thank you all for your feedback!
Hopelesshobo wrote:For balancing purposes, the design to increase the size of the drone bay should be percentage based instead of a flat rate. This would prevent the rig or module from becoming say overpowered for a maruader to fit, but underwhelming for a vexor. I would see this module being more in line as a rig with drawbacks instead of a module.
I have thought about the percentage approach, but I don't find it convincing. You make the example of an underwhelming effect on a Vexor, but I find this is actually positive thing from my OP: My proposed modules will have a higher effect on ships with small drone bays and nearly no effect on ships that are already dedicated drone boats. This is what I was aiming for.
Let's think about a percentage example: The Taranis has 10m-¦ drone bay. To give it another small drone, you'd have to gain a 50% bonus. Even if you would split that bonus into two modules, you would need 23% per module at least. Let's say we make it 25% bonus per module, for nicer numbers. On a dedicated drone boat with 400m-¦ this would mean 100m-¦ extra drone bay for fitting just one module.
Personally I don't like this approach of underwhelming effects on small ships (small drone bays) and overwhelming effects on drone boats.
Hopelesshobo wrote: For the increase in drone bandwidth I can see this falling in line as a percentage base as well so it scales the same with the current balance of the game. I can also see this as being a lowslot module because it modifies the potential damage you can output.
Yes, it could be a low slot module, for this reason. On the other hand, if you are scarifying high slots for the bandwidth, you already lose some DPS possibilities and you also may have to put some low slot modules for the drone bay size.
Hopelesshobo wrote: The other good aspect of changing the drone modifications as described in the OP to percentage based instead of a linear, is we will not see dreads and T3 battlecruisers with drones, and we will see a minimal affect on changing the balance of various ships.
The Talos already has a drone bay, why not fit other Tier3s, if you want? I also don't see a problem with dreads gaining a small drone bay (again). You won't be able to fit a large drone bay on them, because you would be scarifying a lot of tank or gun damage. It wouldn't make sense.
What you see as a good aspect (preventing ships of getting new drone bays) I see as an arbitrary limitation. If you can fit a drone bay with bandwidth and still make it a good fit, that's great for you! I intentionally want to shake some things up with these possibilities.
Jake Sake wrote:When I saw the topic I've read it Ancillary Drone Bay As a non-native speaker, I don't quite get the difference between Auxiliary and Ancillary. To me, the meaning seems to be similar. If Ancillary Drone Bay is better suited for the intended purpose, why not.
Thanks again for your feedback and attention! |
|
Kane Fenris
NWP
140
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 21:41:00 -
[21] - Quote
i sense the intention of making sentry drone blobs even better
the only way i could imagine a module giving more drone bandwidth bay was a high slot module giving +5m-¦ and +5 mbit (maybe even a 1 mod per ship only) |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
323
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 21:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kane Fenris wrote:i sense the intention of making sentry drone blobs even better Not at all my intention, Sir. As I wrote somewhere in my wall of text I acknowledge this problem. I think the sentry assist needs to be fixed and maybe it must be fixed before this idea can make it onto TQ.
Kane Fenris wrote: the only way i could imagine a module giving more drone bandwidth bay was a high slot module giving +5m-¦ and +5 mbit (maybe even a 1 mod per ship only)
That's quite a limitation, but I understand your concerns. If you check the examples I gave in the second post, the proposed idea already has a lot of limitations for fittings. I am convinced that the limitations are so severe that they have good balancing effects.
|
Debora Tsung
The Investment Bankers Guild
678
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 21:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay.
Did he say something about the aux drone bay giving bandwidth to control the drones?
Sry, but I can't be arsed to read all that stuff right now. Stupidity should be a bannable offense.
Also This --> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216699 Please stop making "afk cloak" threads, thanks in advance. |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
323
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 22:05:00 -
[24] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:Maldiro Selkurk wrote:"...or adds a drone bay to a ship that does not have one"
Absolutely not. This handcuffs the devs to having to balance every ship around possibly having a drone bay greatly increasing their balancing headaches and player bellyaching about whether certain ships should have a drone bay. Did he say something about the aux drone bay giving bandwidth to control the drones? Sry, but I can't be arsed to read all that stuff right now. No I didn't.
tldr; - Low slot modules are giving drone bay size, have drawbacks like cargo expanders. - Hi slots are giving bandwidth (and drone control range) via Drone Link Augmentors (they use CPU) - Rigs can give either bonus, but to a smaller extent. Rigs also have other drawbacks: Since they are drone rigs, theyreduce total CPU. |
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
207
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 22:59:00 -
[25] - Quote
Drones need more stuff why? They are already kind nuts honestly. Dominix with more drones? No thanks. |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
323
|
Posted - 2013.12.10 23:06:00 -
[26] - Quote
Zvaarian the Red wrote:Drones need more stuff why? They are already kind nuts honestly. Dominix with more drones? No thanks. If you had read my post, you would have understood that the domi (and other dedicated drone boats) get almost nothing out of this. It's aimed towards ships with small drone bay or no drones. |
Obsidiana
White-Noise
233
|
Posted - 2013.12.13 03:14:00 -
[27] - Quote
Cebraio wrote:Zvaarian the Red wrote:Drones need more stuff why? They are already kind nuts honestly. Dominix with more drones? No thanks. If you had read my post, you would have understood that the domi (and other dedicated drone boats) get almost nothing out of this. It's aimed towards ships with small drone bay or no drones. Wow, I didn't your post either, and I figured that out. 8) Ok, I read a little, so I guess that's cheating.
|
Jessica Danikov
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
150
|
Posted - 2013.12.13 06:53:00 -
[28] - Quote
I think it's an interesting idea that allows more variety in fitting and in ships without being OP if balanced correctly- the problem is always going to be that balancing it would be quite the effort, but I do think it's something that could be made to work.
Hell, given Fozzie's duck-picture hint at EVE Down Under, a Drone overhaul may be in the works as it is. |
Cebraio
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
330
|
Posted - 2013.12.13 10:54:00 -
[29] - Quote
Jessica Danikov wrote:I think it's an interesting idea that allows more variety in fitting and in ships without being OP if balanced correctly- the problem is always going to be that balancing it would be quite the effort, but I do think it's something that could be made to work.
Hell, given Fozzie's duck-picture hint at EVE Down Under, a Drone overhaul may be in the works as it is. Yeah I wish Fozzie or Rise would say a word about their plans and if this would fit in.
C'mon guys today is my 10th EVE anniversary, make it happen! |
Jessica Danikov
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
153
|
Posted - 2013.12.13 10:57:00 -
[30] - Quote
Nah, I reckon they'll hold onto that stuff until FanFest and announce any changes as part of the summer expansion. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |