Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Jan Minayin
Project Kairos The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 11:51:57 -
[61] - Quote
From the perspective of a T2 manufacturer, I'm a bit worried about this move towards faction mods having considerably higher bonuses than the T2 variant.
Given the relative ease of obtaining faction mods via faction warfare LP stores, I can't see anyone preferring the T2 over the faction.
Would it not be better to have faction mods share the best bonus with the T2, and have better fitting and lower drawbacks, to prevent them being better in literally every way. |
Vibiana
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 12:33:20 -
[62] - Quote
Same as for damage mods. Faction damage mods are better in every way. Do you see obsolense of t2 dam mods? |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
705
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 12:42:06 -
[63] - Quote
Vibiana wrote:Same as for damage mods. Faction damage mods are better in every way. Do you see obsolense of t2 dam mods? yep. 5-15% increase in overall performance for between 40 and 200 times the price is unlikely to create straight obsolescence.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Berluth Luthian
Hoplite Brigade
203
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 13:35:56 -
[64] - Quote
CCP Delegate Zero wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:So, what will happen to the 50mm reinforced steel plate BPOs and the micro shield extender BPOs? Good question, the plan is to update the 50mm blueprints to 100mm plate prints. As these are BPOs they will be updated to the equivalent 100mm variants. There are no micro shield extender blueprints with the exception of the existing storyline module print and that will shift to its new 100mm incarnation. On the concerns raised about plates, primarily on tech II plates, we will take another look. This will likely involve a change to the respective balance of tech II and storyline plates. We'll also take another look at the balance within the faction meta groups in light of feedback. A general point on module tiericide as an aside: one of the main points of the exercise as a whole is to get the large range of modules in the game into a more coherent state that will actually facilitate balancing more frequently as needed in the future.
Will you ever look at LP store offerings/costs as a part of tiericide? |
Thanatos Marathon
Black Fox Marauders Spaceship Bebop
453
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 13:45:49 -
[65] - Quote
Berluth Luthian wrote:
Will you ever look at LP store offerings/costs as a part of tiericide?
Please get rid of the need for tags to make items in the LP store and up the LP amount required to offset it.
Also, nerfing armor!? |
Ben Ishikela
32
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 13:50:28 -
[66] - Quote
Is there something possible like wanting to buy a placeholder/emptyitem in the LP store. You need a Tag to buy it. It costs negative LP. ==> they pay you with LP for handing in Tags.
Thanatos Marathon wrote:Berluth Luthian wrote: Will you ever look at LP store offerings/costs as a part of tiericide?
Please get rid of the need for tags to make items in the LP store and up the LP amount required to offset it. Also, nerfing armor!?
Add new modules or ships that can use tactics and strategies to shake any op meta or use totaly different gameplay yourself to make it happen! yay :)
|
Andre Vauban
quantum cats syndicate
402
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:27:03 -
[67] - Quote
Jan Minayin wrote:From the perspective of a T2 manufacturer, I'm a bit worried about this move towards faction mods having considerably higher bonuses than the T2 variant.
Given the relative ease of obtaining faction mods via faction warfare LP stores, I can't see anyone preferring the T2 over the faction.
Would it not be better to have faction mods share the best bonus with the T2, and have better fitting and lower drawbacks, to prevent them being better in literally every way.
Faction modules are actually a very unpopular item to obtain from the FW LP stores. They require an insane number of tags to purchase. Faction plate prices will go through the roof as the supply won't be able to meet the demand because the tags are going to be a MAJOR bottleneck. I think T2 plates will still have a solid place for the price conscious (ie anything other than T3's or pirate/faction BS).
.
|
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
89
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 14:28:18 -
[68] - Quote
Xercodo wrote:I think that the fitting of the plates and SEs need to reflect their active tanking counter parts.
You need an SSE to be comparable to a small booster to fit, and 1600mm plates should match a LAR.
Additionally, these modules should give benefits that reflect this. I want to see the day where a buffer fit doesnt require 3 plates to be competitive and then STILL need resists on top of that. Likewise goes fro LSEs
This also means that yes, like the other are saying, we need an XLSE to match the booster.
And while we're on the topic you need put a shield recharge penalty on SEs and buff the crap out of shield rechargers to make them worth it. There's no reason to fit a recharger over an SE at all, like ever. You need yo make the shield tankers pick between buffer to passive recharge, not give them both, because it makes them REALLY annoying to kill. They get a cap-free recharge buff to their buffer.
And since we're talking amount over recharge can we get another small buff to cap batteries? They use WAY too much PG and CPU for that tiny neuting defense. They help, but are still generally not worth it. Maybe make their benefits comparable to their SE counter parts?
I am not sure we need XLSE as Armor do not have XLAR so there is a trade off. I do like your idea about giving SE a regen penalty. They are getting dual bonuses while AP one get buffer. Also like the idea of buffing shield recharges and batteries as right now I do not know anyone that fits batteries they need to increase your cap pool by a significant amount or be changed to act something like cap boosters but able to store power generated by your ship to be able to be re injected back at a amount over time. |
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
690
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:03:01 -
[69] - Quote
Vibiana wrote:Same as for damage mods. Faction damage mods are better in every way. Do you see obsolense of t2 dam mods? There is no reason to use a T2 damage mod except for price. If your ship is already approaching 1B in value, you use faction. The same will be the case with plates and extenders.
Balancing modules by price is a bad idea. For one you have to constantly adjust the drop rates and materials consumed to ensure the price differences are roughly as intended, which then steps on the idea of a player-driven market. Worse though is there isn't any smart, meaningful choice as it applies to your ship. The choice is entirely based on your wallet. The choice to use one mod over another should be based on how it affects the ship.
Faction damage mods should use more CPU for example. These plates and extenders with more EHP should also be harder to fit or they should have increased mass/sig penalties.
There are all our dominion
Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
|
Masao Kurata
Perkone Caldari State
232
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 15:14:42 -
[70] - Quote
Hmm, I think you should increase the powergrid requirements of small shield extenders if you're going to buff their HP this much, they're too close to free now that they're not useless. Unlike most modules, you don't have to worry about breaking too many fits by changing fitting parameters drastically because any fit with an SSE before this patch was a bad fit.
Other than that, I wonder what the introduction of compact tank and propulsion modules in the same patch will do to fits. Many fits which were previously impossible or required prohibitive fitting implants will be possible with the new named modules. |
|
Phaade
Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF
349
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 16:03:22 -
[71] - Quote
Moac Tor wrote:I'd be hesitant to go any larger than LSE's and 1600mms. Battleships already come equipped with massive tanks built into the ships base stats, allowing even larger buffers would have a big change on the current meta. TrouserDeagle wrote:I'd drop 100mm plates, they're never worth a slot. it's hard enough finding a use for 200mms (and 800mms). instead of fitting a small plate with tank rigs, it's often better and faster to use ACRs and a big plate. small plate gank fits probably will still be bad compared to hull tank fits, because of hull tanks being stupid (capless, omni resist, 0 pg, no penalty buffer tank, just why). so yeah, the high bang:buck of ancillary armour reps, and more recently bulkhead rigs, has gotten me to drop the 200mm plates from all my frigate fits except mwd + plate gang fits. I used to solo with AAR + 200mm plate fits, but swapping the plate for an adaptive nano plating typically improved the total ehp when factoring in the AAR, while also being easier fitting and having no mass increase.
I'm just going to guess that small extenders aren't going to be very useful even with that huge buff. midslots are life. people are armour tanking ships that have 5 mids and 2 lows because webs and ewar are so high value. I hope you guys see that this is bad, rather than celebrating it as some player driven emergent sandbox something something.
those restrained extenders seem to have much more lenient penalties than the restrained plates. currently the armour/shield rigs already add as much or more penalty than the actual plates/extenders. I guess they'll be way more after this. I'd like it if tank rigs were much lower impact, but with less crippling penalties. I agree with this. Plates are overshadowed, 200mm or 800mm rarely get used in any of my fittings, and 100mm are non existant. Ancillary reppers have made this situation even more severe.
Perhaps, but look at how underused battleships are in general today. More tank wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing for them. |
khaip ur
K.C.C
3
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 16:35:51 -
[72] - Quote
I know the consensus is that 100mm plates are useless by my OCD insists that I bring this up. The restrained 100mm should be 30000 instead of 32500 so that it gives about the same percentage bonus as the other sizes. ~85%. Also 800mm restrained should be 1150000. |
Xercodo
Xovoni Directorate
4192
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 17:19:54 -
[73] - Quote
Fredric Wolf wrote:
I am not sure we need XLSE as Armor do not have XLAR so there is a trade off. I do like your idea about giving SE a regen penalty. They are getting dual bonuses while AP one get buffer. Also like the idea of buffing shield recharges and batteries as right now I do not know anyone that fits batteries they need to increase your cap pool by a significant amount or be changed to act something like cap boosters but able to store power generated by your ship to be able to be re injected back at a amount over time.
Yes but we DO have XL boosters.
Lets go ahead and continue the trend of shield modules being oversized all the time since it seems to be pretty unique to them. Just make sure that the costs are on par with the boosters, maybe a cap regen penalty?
Like what if you only needed one 1600mm plate to be fitted to a Abaddon to give it all the HP it needs, but it also uses more PG than a LAR and has a small cap penalty to make up for being passive?
Something to that effect. Since you'll have less slots devoted to spamming more plates/SEs then maybe fitting a cap recharger or power relay the counteract the penalty would make sense?
Can take or leave that last bit, point is, balance them so that only 1 plate or SE should be all you need and that while dual plates and SEs could be possible, will be hard to work with because of shear fitting needs, similarly to boosters and reppers.
The Drake is a Lie
|
Aristash
The Flying Dead. The Afterlife.
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 17:50:48 -
[74] - Quote
bad decision.
hate this ****** module tiercid
|
Brother Mercury
Fire on the Mountain
14
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 18:33:00 -
[75] - Quote
800 and 1600 plates (besides the imperial navy/fed navy versions) got a serious nerf here.
3 cpu increase on the 1600 plate is a HUGE nerf to Amarr fitting.
Let me be clear, I'm not saying there shouldn't be a small drawback/sacrifice to fitting 1600 plates -- there should be some drawback to fitting 1600 plates. However, this is exactly my point -- there already is a significant drawback to putting 1600 plates on Amarr ships.
Before this nerf (cpu increase) every Amarr ship I can think of worth fitting has to sacrifice some modules (either damage control, web, cap booster, point) to fit on decent plates. The CPU on Amarr ships is that tight -- fine.
But this takes it too far. Adding CPU to 800/1600 plates is going to require some serious fitting changes and will really hurt a ships combat capabilities. I honestly think it will not just require downgrading a damage control or an ewar module, but even forcing some Amarr ships to use CPU rigs.
This is too much.
Please consider this CCP, 3 CPU is nothing to laugh at for Amarr ships. |
Eija-Riitta Veitonen
Unicorn Enterprise
213
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 19:28:12 -
[76] - Quote
I like the changes. Especially to the shield extenders. The small ones will be much more usable now! |
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
723
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 19:45:56 -
[77] - Quote
Regolith shield extender is now better in all classes compared to azeotropic.
A TINY sig radius difference is not enough of a reason why anyone would want to fit zeotropic over regolith.
This should be changed. Regolith is lower powergrid, azeotropic is lower CPU requirement. now its meaningful.
To be fair, there should be a 3rd option, for lower sig radius penalty, but it will not be popular. |
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
286
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 19:54:28 -
[78] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:Guys! You have a serious opportunity here to make Small Shield Extenders not useless! Please don't let it go by!
I have a dream. It is not a big dream. It is a small dream. In my dream, Small Shield Extenders are a good option for frigates and Medium Shield Extenders are a good option for cruisers. Must I abandon my dream?
Seconded
The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans.
http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2103
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 20:02:15 -
[79] - Quote
I always imagined that you would address the use oversized tanking modules with tiericide. It is disappointing that this confusion will remain.
Also, you must really like the kiting meta to be nerfing plates. Could we see some usage stats?
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
973
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 03:32:19 -
[80] - Quote
Zappity wrote:I always imagined that you would address the use oversized tanking modules with tiericide. It is disappointing that this confusion will remain.
Also, you must really like the kiting meta to be nerfing plates. Could we see some usage stats?
This is far and away the most dissappointing aspect of this update. It would have been a wonderful opportunity to rationalize the idiotic system we currently have in Eve.
The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
|
|
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
281
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 05:42:03 -
[81] - Quote
'scuse my lack of understanding, but why not have a range of meta plates, to present a continuum between T1 and T2, with associated continuum of drawback?
For posting an idea into F&I:
come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it.....
If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
|
Raith Crimson
Scarlet Knighthood Arx Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 06:07:14 -
[82] - Quote
But.....complexity is necessary in a game about the endless night of a game about space.
Imagine travelling across the galaxy only to find that they have all the same stuff as you.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
More content, less faffing around with what we already have.
Personally i resent this simplification of our wonderfully complex and compelling game. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
711
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 06:15:06 -
[83] - Quote
Raith Crimson wrote:But.....complexity is necessary in a game about the endless night of a game about space.
Imagine travelling across the galaxy only to find that they have all the same stuff as you.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
More content, less faffing around with what we already have.
Personally i resent this simplification of our wonderfully complex and compelling game. It is broke though. Several modules are nigh on unused and several others are only barely used, and then usually only by bads. Has to do with m4 mods being, in many cases, just straight up better than m0-m3, and t2 better than m4 on everything but fitting, so they are used almost exclusively, which means that the intended balancing feature from when the modules were new, rarity, has completely been messed up in the time since, and so they are in need of actual balance, not scarcity from when the game was much smaller and there were fewer high sp folks toasting rats in one shot.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Nagarythe Tinurandir
House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness
207
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 08:21:08 -
[84] - Quote
Zappity wrote:I always imagined that you would address the use oversized tanking modules with tiericide. It is disappointing that this confusion will remain.
Also, you must really like the kiting meta to be nerfing plates. Could we see some usage stats?
QFT.
Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see all the smaller ships being flown more, but a confirmation that the Devs acknowledge the issue and are working it would be nice.
|
Arla Sarain
452
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 10:12:03 -
[85] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Zappity wrote:I always imagined that you would address the use oversized tanking modules with tiericide. It is disappointing that this confusion will remain.
Also, you must really like the kiting meta to be nerfing plates. Could we see some usage stats? QFT. Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see all the smaller ships being flown more, but a confirmation that the Devs acknowledge the issue and are working it would be nice. How would this work?
Incoming DPS is too high for small boosters to do anything with.
Small shields will get neglected in favor of MASBs if medium extenders are put out of reach of frigs. |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
2111
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 10:20:32 -
[86] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Zappity wrote:I always imagined that you would address the use oversized tanking modules with tiericide. It is disappointing that this confusion will remain.
Also, you must really like the kiting meta to be nerfing plates. Could we see some usage stats? QFT. Don't get me wrong, it's nice to see all the smaller ships being flown more, but a confirmation that the Devs acknowledge the issue and are working it would be nice. How would this work? Incoming DPS is too high for small boosters to do anything with. Small shields will get neglected in favor of MASBs if medium extenders are put out of reach of frigs. I'm sure they could figure it out if they turned their eye to it.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Karak Bol
Low-Sec Survival Ltd.
222
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 10:56:48 -
[87] - Quote
I just want to rise a voice for differences between armor and shield tank.
Shield: XL Booster, but less Buffer Armor: XL Plate (1600 was probably intended as oversized), but less active tank
Maybe you could change some stats, so 1600 really is a BS only oversized plate, 800 were the 1600 is now and then work downwards. Later, when you tiericide Active tanks, the same treatment for Shield Boosters. (XL = BS only, L = todays XL = BC and downwards) |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
691
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 11:01:40 -
[88] - Quote
Justified Rage surrounding the Barbican storyline 800mm PG increase aside, I like the fact that Imperial Navy plates provide more armour, while being more massive compared to Federation Fleet ones, and also the reduced signature penalty on the Thukker SEs.
I like it. A lot.
// Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept
//
Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1172
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 12:20:36 -
[89] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:Justified Rage surrounding the Barbican storyline 800mm PG increase aside, I like the fact that Imperial Navy plates provide more armour, while being more massive compared to Federation Fleet ones, and also the reduced signature penalty on the Thukker SEs. I like it. A lot.
indeed would be nice if shields got the same sort of treatment
Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists.
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
|
James Zimmer
Furtherance.
15
|
Posted - 2015.05.22 14:24:41 -
[90] - Quote
First, good choice in getting rid of 50mm plates. No one used them and it will make life less confusing for new players who may not realize that they are never the right choice.
Second, I like the idea of tiericide, but these changes seem to be focused purely on reducing options, rather than giving interesting choices. For example, my old logic ran like this:
Meta 0: Don't use Meta 1: Don't use Meta 2: Don't use Meta 3: Use if you can't fit or pay for Meta 4 Meta 4: Use if you can't fit T2 T2: Use if fitting isn't an issue
My new logic pretty much runs like this
Meta 0: Don't use. Compact: Use if you can't fit restrained Restrained: Use if you can't fit T2 T2: Use when fitting isn't an issue
As you can see, Meta 1/2 went away, but other than that, there is no change to my logic, except that you eliminated cost as a potential factor in my decision. I would prefer that you keep the same number of modules, but you replace the meta 1/2 modules with interesting choices, like a shield extender that gives fewer hit points, but gives, say an 10% bonus to EM resists, or an armor plate that absorbs a lot of heat from overheated modules, but doesn't take much damage from it, making it an effective heat sink. You could potentially spice up the metagame a lot, and maybe even create situations where T2 doesn't equal strictly better, which I, personally, would find facinating. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |