Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1526
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:46:39 -
[91] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:James Baboli wrote:Back to the topic: Without a massive boost to passive tanking, these mods are pretty well sunk in my books. More buffer is almost always more helpful than any of the pure recharge time mods, and so unless you have slots but not CPU, it's usually going to be PDSes for the buffer, recharge, and ability to fit more and/or bigger extenders. At what point should rechargers overtake buffer mods? IMO,after the 2nd extender, it should be 1 recharge then another extender then 2 recharge in order of most effect per slot for passive tank. I realized after asking this that that was a poor metric without further definition. Depending on the buffer mods used and the ship it could range from as little as near the current 15% up to almost 45%. On the one hand 35%-40% works for most ships within the cruiser range using LSEs (gila's high base shields making it an outlier), but that's a pretty massive buff on the BS side and frigates/destroyers often don't have the fitting to make the metric relevant.
I suppose if the buff to BS passive tanks isn't an issue ~35% might be a good number. |
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
264
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:53:36 -
[92] - Quote
I actually disagree and feel the opposite.
Right now, knowing it goes at the end means I don't have to know anything to search for a compact module.
I can (in theory) go in the market and search "Compact shield booster" "compact shield extender" "compact torpedo launcher" "compact sensor booster" and just KNOW without having to memorize flavor names, this will find the correct module.
Fzhal wrote:CCP Terminus wrote:So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Have you considered moving all the "Compact" type words to the front of the names. It makes shopping and fitting so much easier. If I know I'm short on CPU my eyes could quickly find Compact modules instead of having to read each and every category line for the important part in the middle... Shield Power Relay I Mark I Compact Shield Power Relay Type-D Restrained Shield Power Relay Shield Power Relay II 'Basic' Shield Power Relay Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay Vs (Much Better) Shield Power Relay I Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Shield Power Relay II 'Basic' Shield Power Relay (why are the single quotes used anyway?) Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay To be honest, I've never liked the I/II scheme because it puts the important info at the end. I really wish all the schemes were more like: Std. Shield Power Relay Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Adv. Shield Power Relay 'Basic' Shield Power Relay [Adv./Prototype] Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay
You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
376
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 04:31:22 -
[93] - Quote
We could go real crazy and remove flavor text from non story mods. |
James Baboli
Novablasters
922
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 05:28:11 -
[94] - Quote
CCP Terminus wrote:James Zimmer wrote:The greater question is: What would I do with a 658 DPS tank Rattlesnake? There are much better options for virtually every mission and deadspace plex, so wormholes probably, C2s specificly because it won't be able to tank anything higher. It would run them like a beast, but that's a lot of risk, and I could easily run C2s in a much-cheaper ship. So maybe a better statement about shield rechargers would be this: Shield rechargers can make passive-tanked battleships stronger in cases where cost is a concern, but that may be irrelevant because passive-tanked battleships may not be practical anyway. This is probably completely valid, hence the looking in to actual usage metrics to see if we should change the module set further.
From medium distant history to me, less than 658 DPS tank will work in c3s, and as part of a team in c4s though you end up needing to remove DPS quickly in c4s with that sort of tank.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
160
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 20:44:21 -
[95] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Shilalasar wrote:One of the problems with a passivetank is the amount of fittingslots you use that could otherwise be used for damage or projection.
The first idea that came to my mind making these modules more useful was to lower the fittingrequirements even more, there are almost no midslot modules that take <15 cpu. Lowering the fitting requirement won't change your stated problem. A shield recharger will still take a valuable mid slot even if it cost 0 PG and 0 CPU.
Yeah, those are two unrelated statements. Sorry that was not clear. |
Lidia Caderu
Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 10:00:03 -
[96] - Quote
Flux coils need boost, set at lest 35% for T2 version, in other case there is no much sense in that module, including hi CPU usage. |
Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 11:29:57 -
[97] - Quote
CCP Terminus wrote:
This is probably completely valid, hence the looking in to actual usage metrics to see if we should change the module set further.
Could we get an update on what kinds of direction you guys might be leaning on for flux coils and rechargers? A lot of us would be really excited for some new directions to take shield tanking. OS extender bait brick and 1 oversized asb + 1 undersized asb as the only two optimal fits is getting a little stale.
What if the shield recharger was an active module. 10 sec cycle, 50% reduction in shield recharge time, cap recharge goes to zero. You trade all your cap and start using cap since it's an active module in exchange for huge shield recharge. Makes you really vulnerable to neuts. You would use it after you pull range to buffer up your shield or warp to a safe. Or with cap less cap booster fed fits.
And I would like to reiterate on the low slot flux cool idea I have but with values for t2. 20% increase in shield hit points, with 35% increase in shield recharge time. You net lose recharge, but gain substantial buffer in exchange, and when you rebalance layerings, 20% increase in hitpoints, with 10% increase in the mass of fitted plates. |
Nya Kittenheart
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 19:32:02 -
[98] - Quote
Kenrailae wrote:Yay ish sticky now!
But seriously, can we cut the crap with all this stalling and do t3's and sentries?? Nothing can be really balanced while t3's and sentries are so broken. Really this is all wasted effort until the real problems are fixed. Hint: shield recharges are not the major issue.
Sentries are not broken Ishtar is .
Concerning the current change i still find shield recharge way too weak to be usable in any meaningful way and honnestly if passive recharge as a tanking way would dissapear nobody would notice to be honnest. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2477
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 04:26:53 -
[99] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. I think metas just need to drop way less. Meta variants should cost way more than T1 and only sometimes less than T2. T1 should be used by anyone trying to save ISK, esp. newer players and on whelp fits.
.
|
Zekora Rally
Negative Density Whatever.
19
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 14:12:00 -
[100] - Quote
Altrue wrote:CCP Terminus wrote:So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting.
It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE.
Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. If the Shield Rechargers are getting stopped from being buffed because of Rattlesnakes only, maybe its time to nerf Rattlesnakes then? I mean they can solo drifters by passive tanking, maybe they are a tiny bit over-powered? The rattlesnake is the only sub cap in the game that can boast of having a great passive tank and it comes at the cost of fitting almost every other slot with a tank module, if you want to be able to run C5 sites solo at least.
CCP Terminus wrote:So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting.
It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE.
Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. Even with the rattlesnake, i've found it better to swap out shield rechargers for passive shield resistance mods as having much better resists trumps the extra 50 or so regen gained with the shield recharger, everytime, especially if one is fitting against sleepers that do more EM/THERMAL than KIN/EXP and vice versa.
If we had adaptive passive shield tanking modules, the shield recharger might make a bit more sense with the freed up mid slots, but I, as well those in my corp that know what they are doing, have to the conclusion that there's no need to fit more than one shield recharger on a C5 combat site running rattlesnake fit. |
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2482
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 14:31:03 -
[101] - Quote
Altrue wrote:CCP Terminus wrote:So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting.
It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE.
Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. If the Shield Rechargers are getting stopped from being buffed because of Rattlesnakes only, maybe its time to nerf Rattlesnakes then? I mean they can solo drifters by passive tanking, maybe they are a tiny bit over-powered? I am more inclined to say that the reason Rattlesnakes even use them is because there are no shield extenders big enough for battleships. It's primarily Rattlesnakes because there aren't a lot of other battleships with a passive tank bonus. The Rokh lacks mid slots and large turrets aren't great for ratting, and the Navy Scorpion while fully able to fit a Rattlesnake tank, is underwhelming because large missiles are fairly weak if you don't have a web/painter and that diminishes the tank. In short, it's because the Rattlesnake is specifically the drone+passive shield combo, but more specifically because there are no proper shield extenders for battleships. Give battleships an X-Large Shield Extender and you will never see a Rattlesnake sporting a shield recharger again. Then we can talk about buffing shield rechargers.
Want my advice? I say increase shield recharge bonuses by a huge amount but give shield recharge effects a stacking penalty. Make it so 4 mods can give you around 3-5x recharge rate.
Give me a top hat.
|
BugraT WarheaD
170
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 15:26:47 -
[102] - Quote
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. This. |
Terra Chrall
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 17:59:21 -
[103] - Quote
What if shield rechargers had a bonus to reduce sig penalties from other mods/rigs? So instead of of trading buffer or resists for recharge only, you are getting recharge and a better signature when using modules that increase your sig. Now you have an interesting choice as to which stats you are modifying. Of course it would never lower you below your base signature and shouldn't completely negate penalties either. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
2492
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 06:51:56 -
[104] - Quote
I don't think that a module to reduce your signature is ever going to be a good idea, because you will find ships fitting them into spare mids (eg; jackdaw, Sacrilege, etc) with AAR tanks in order to get a synergy between low-sig armour tank and the sig-reducing module.
Consider also the effect of this in Wolf-Rayet wormholes with T3 Destroyers such as an armour-fit Svipul with links in a C13 already gets down to a sig radius of 23m, if you chopped that another 20% it gets down to the same sig as a light drone. Ridiculous.
- - - I think that the one or two uses of shield rechargers (rattler, SNI) might barely justify keeping them as they are, but unless they become significantly stronger the maths will work against them every time, as proved above.
- - -
I will again plump the idea of the Flux Coil being a module for the passive transfer of capacitor to shield. It would create interesting Bhaalgorn fits in pulsars, where you could suck cap from your opponents and convert the capacitor into shield hitpoints, etc, and similarly in k-space.
Another thing to consider CCP Terminus, when discussing Rattlesnakes in PVE, is the fact that by and large the way they are being used these days in most situations besides nullsec anomalies (where they are mostly overkill for the purpose they are used in) is in tandem with a depot.
90% ofRattler pilots will drop a depot and tractor, and refit on the fly using the depot to switch between tank and gank, or if being ganked in a wormhole, MJD and stabs. Rattler pairs in C4's will also hot swap high slots between cap transfers, shield RR and smartbombs using a depot.
So I gues, when looking at Rattlesnake usage of shield rechargers, you have to consider that the guys using them are probably not permanently using them anyway; during high DPS phases of running a combat site or DED complex you may fit the recharger for a minute or two to gain the extra 50 HP/s recharge, but when the DPs falls off you can swap immediately for a passive hardener, or an Omnidirectional Tracking Link and get uber drone tracking, or a target painter, etc.
Likewise a proper C4 rattler will have a full DPS gank fit and a full passive fit; when your partner is being primed you swap SPR's for DCU's, in the very least, and then swap back when he reports aggro switch.
As said before, if you make the flux coil an active module, the choice therefore if whether to activate it (and be unable to swap out the module if aggro switches) or swap it for a passive module.
Just my 5c.
Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob
We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
Fzhal
Tessaract Industries
35
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 19:45:34 -
[105] - Quote
Or you could just search for "compact sensor booster" and look for what starts with Compact. And searching for "Compact shield booster" would yield all sizes.
Think about it, when you look at an item's variation tab (I think) it lists things by Meta level, which was immensely helpful. Now that they are going away from Meta level, it will not be as easy.
Shopping while browsing the market has always been more of a chore than it should be, because of the order things are listed: Primary sort = [Not T2] then T2 (Thankfully Metta 6+ has their own categories) Secondary sort = Alphabetical Which will have the lowest CPU? Gonna have to go to the item section scroll through all, until T2, and remember the lowest CPU so far, then keep scrolling for a lower one. Found it! Oops, what was the name of that lowest CPU mod, I know it was "[Something] Compact", but what did it start with... Drat, Gonna have to scroll up looking for that lowest number again. Wait, while trying to remember the module name I forgot what the lowest CPU number was, FRACK!!! It's madness! It is so bad that we all know that the best way to create a new fit is to generate a shopping list in a 3rd party program (that lists them by fitting need), import the list, view market for each item...
The current market sorting and module naming conventions actually INHIBIT
You do have a point though, which is why I'd revise my request to name things by: 1. Fitting/Effectiveness Indicator - "[Basic/Compact/Prototype/Restrained/Standard/Superior]" 2. Item Type - "Shield Power Relay" 3. Flavor Text - "Type-D"
We can both win Chance... Maybe someone could make some Effectiveness indicators that are also alphabetically ordered as well!
Chance Ravinne wrote:I actually disagree and feel the opposite. Right now, knowing it goes at the end means I don't have to know anything to search for a compact module. I can (in theory) go in the market and search "Compact shield booster" "compact shield extender" "compact torpedo launcher" "compact sensor booster" and just KNOW without having to memorize flavor names, this will find the correct module. Fzhal wrote:CCP Terminus wrote:So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Have you considered moving all the "Compact" type words to the front of the names. It makes shopping and fitting so much easier. If I know I'm short on CPU my eyes could quickly find Compact modules instead of having to read each and every category line for the important part in the middle... To be honest, I've never liked the I/II scheme because it puts the important info at the end. I really wish all the schemes were more like: Std. Shield Power Relay Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Adv. Shield Power Relay 'Basic' Shield Power Relay [Adv./Prototype] Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay
|
Kaivar Lancer
Placid Peace Corps
624
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 22:11:21 -
[106] - Quote
I love the module tiercide. Keep it up CCP. :) |
Delarian Rox
New Home Inc.
22
|
Posted - 2015.07.02 12:37:39 -
[107] - Quote
Rechargers: I think rechargers are fine right there they will be after tiercide. We should compare them with resistance amplifiers and not with resistance wards(cap usage, harder to fit) or extenders(HUGE fitting difference) so they are actualy fine in some standard situations.
Coils and relays: I think flux coil real recharge bonus should be better. You'll almost never feel power relay drawback on a passive tanked ships even if you try to speedtank with AB(most comon situation), but you'll feel it with flux coil as it reduces ship ability to sustain alfa strike and you can fall under regeneration peak more easily. They just more risky so they should be more powerful. |
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
242
|
Posted - 2015.07.02 14:07:31 -
[108] - Quote
I doubt hardly anyone fits either of those three module types so maybe best to delete them or radically change their stats to make them worth fitting. Certainly fitting shield recharger modules is always a sign of a badly fitted ship whether in PvE or PvP.
" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick.
" Find out what ? "-áAbraham.
" They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick.
Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
|
Kyanite Sentak
The Minutemen The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 16:36:56 -
[109] - Quote
So what's up making the game less 'Complex' you guys do realize fans of this game enjoy the complexity... if we wanted some simple disneyland that was easy to play we'd be over at Blizzard playing WoW.
Work on that rectalcranial... I'll be quitting this game if it is oversimplified. |
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
39
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 14:25:42 -
[110] - Quote
Vic Vorlon wrote:@Nagarythe, the advantage with T1 modules is that you can manufacture them yourself. For some circumstances, that's enough of a benefit. If you want better modules (the meta ones) you have to go ratting or go shopping. This is true, but many meta modules are very cheap. Most of the time, choosing the base T1 module has only disadvantages. In my opinion, every module in the game should be useful. |
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2957
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 17:20:31 -
[111] - Quote
CCP Terminus wrote:So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats?
Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1171
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 17:38:20 -
[112] - Quote
Algarion Getz wrote:Vic Vorlon wrote:@Nagarythe, the advantage with T1 modules is that you can manufacture them yourself. For some circumstances, that's enough of a benefit. If you want better modules (the meta ones) you have to go ratting or go shopping. This is true, but many meta modules are very cheap. Most of the time, choosing the base T1 module has only disadvantages. In my opinion, every module in the game should be useful.
The t1 modules are useful. If you're a brokebutt noob and it's all you can fit or afford. As you progress in the game you get better stuff.
I'll play analogy gal. When you get out of school and start out in life on your own. Rhaman noodles are pretty awesome. Warm and filling and not poison to your body. (t1)
Then you get a premant job, the bills are paid down. Spagetti and some meatballs are great. Same noodles (more or less) but now you can afford to add some sauce and some ground up cow, because you can afford it. (meta)
You've worked you way up in the company and you're a department head. You go out for dinner. Lingini w/ alfredo sauce and sprinkle some clam across it. (t2)
You had a banner year! Life is awesome. You spend your 'Im awesome' bonus on prime rib, imported wine, some lobster. (faction/ded bling)
So now you're in your x-type mach blitzing level 4 missions. Rhaman noodles don't even enter your mind, but out there somewhere there is a brokebutt noob wipin the sweat off his forehead thanking his lucky stars that his t1 shield booster got him passed those 3 frigates in the lvl 1 pirate abound mission.
It's all relative dude. Everything is useful. At the end of the day, if a module is only useful for invention.... so what?
|
|
CCP Terminus
C C P C C P Alliance
286
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 01:52:41 -
[113] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats?
Nothing yet. Aegis and sov have taken priority for now. I'll make sure to post an update when there's more information.
@CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters
|
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1304
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 04:00:09 -
[114] - Quote
CCP Terminus wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats?
Nothing yet. Aegis and sov have taken priority for now. I'll make sure to post an update when there's more information.
Thank you for at least responding with that much.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
HiddenPorpoise
Expendable Miscreants
383
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 09:09:19 -
[115] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:The t1 modules are useful. If you're a brokebutt noob and it's all you can fit or afford. As you progress in the game you get better stuff.
Nearly all non gun/tank mods meta is cheaper, noobs use t1 because they don't know. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
1186
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 12:58:55 -
[116] - Quote
HiddenPorpoise wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:The t1 modules are useful. If you're a brokebutt noob and it's all you can fit or afford. As you progress in the game you get better stuff.
Nearly all non gun/tank mods meta is cheaper, noobs use t1 because they don't know.
That's fine too. It defines the line. t1 user = noob. meta user = young pilot on his way up in the world.
The proliferation of meta mods is due to cry bears lobbying for things like mtu. Automating the gathering of resources is not good for the games economy. The closer you get to passive - the more everything loses value. Moon goo is a perfect example of how something for nothing is bad for the game. Pilots that can't see 3 years down the road are proffering ideas for deployables that salvage and so forth.
The same can be said for faction and DED modules. A faction fit ship used to be a rare, expensive and powerful thing. The LP stores and caldari navy gear (just picked one for example) means everyone gets faction gear at a fraction of what it used to be. Same w/ null bears lobbying for anoms. There used to be 3 x-type boosters and 1 x-type armor repper on sale in Jita - that was rare poop at a premium price. Now there are price wars and market manipulations on that stuff.
Faction BS used to cost 1B isk (give or take) and they were rare. Now I have stacks of them and they are dirt cheap.
My point. If you want to ***** about modules and their priceing - lobby for a fix that will actually add value to the modules/market/game. Tweaking a few stats treats the symptoms. You need to go after the disease.
If CCP wants to balance modules they first have to get the productions stream (from resource gathering to market hub shelf) under control. There is little point to wasting resources on balancing and providing strata for a family of modules if there is no real cost difference to force cost vs performance decisions.
Right now it's basically (for pvp) fit t2. If you have cpu/grid issues put on faction. That's messed up.
TL/DR: CCP needs to slowly draw down the meta and faction drops to put some ACTUAL VALUE differences between the modules or no amount of balancing tweaks will mean anything. They should do this without telling us or putting it in any patch notes (market manipulation reasons)
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2960
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 14:04:57 -
[117] - Quote
CCP Terminus wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats?
Nothing yet. Aegis and sov have taken priority for now. I'll make sure to post an update when there's more information. Understandable, Thank you for the update.
Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
|
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1309
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 14:10:56 -
[118] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote: If CCP wants to balance modules they first have to get the productions stream (from resource gathering to market hub shelf) under control. There is little point to wasting resources on balancing and providing strata for a family of modules if there is no real cost difference to force cost vs performance decisions.
Right now it's basically (for pvp) fit t2. If you have cpu/grid issues put on faction. That's messed up.
TL/DR: CCP needs to slowly draw down the meta and faction drops to put some ACTUAL VALUE differences between the modules or no amount of balancing tweaks will mean anything. They should do this without telling us or putting it in any patch notes (market manipulation reasons)
Agree with this.
I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here?
I'm stubborn.
|
|
CCP Terminus
C C P C C P Alliance
290
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 17:25:41 -
[119] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote: I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module.
As far as I know that's been talked about as an actual plan for the future, or some variant of it. Making T1 more valuable as a manufacturing component and tying the meta prices to the t1 modules.
@CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters
|
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2960
|
Posted - 2015.07.15 17:35:25 -
[120] - Quote
CCP Terminus, are we going to see new faction and meta modules for everything that does not have a meta and or faction variation of it? For example Data and Relic analyzers?
Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |