Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
32882
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 18:11:10 -
[1] - Quote
I just saw the new figures for hull bonuses and transfer modules, and it's apparent that you're looking to balance those things. A flat transfer amount is very simplistic and has required some attention for some time now. However, I think you're going about this the wrong way.
You're making fitting more painful for a ship's intended role, and that's just all kinds of wrong. If that's its role, let it have its modules, and don't gimp the rest of its fit because transfers are imbalanced.
Isolate modules and balance those in the way you know: make transfers use the same formula as turrets, but for a +hp instead of -hp. Not only would this allow you to balance transfers in a way you already know, but it would also add more depth to transfer mechanics in a way that we also know.
It would take into account tracking, signature radius and resolution, and require active piloting by logistics pilots. To be effective logistics pilots, players will have to perform manual pilotage instead of orbiting an anchor. That's something you want, right?
Furthermore, transfer turrets could be scripted, and you could make ancillary versions that use cap booster charges. Just spitballing there.
The bottom line of my suggestion: Transfers should be converted to turrets, complete with signature radius, tracking, and the turret damage formula. It encourages manual piloting and all the awareness and active gameplay that goes with it. It would be a game mechanic that you are accustomed to balancing, compared to this new mechanic that also requires fitting modules.
Transfers as turrets is just elegant.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
302
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 18:52:06 -
[2] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I just saw the new figures for hull bonuses and transfer modules
What are you talking about? Is this some unofficial thing on Reddit? Because I see nothing in the forums where new stuff comes in (General Discussion, Information Portal, Features & Ideas).
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Iain Cariaba
2062
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:02:08 -
[3] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I just saw the new figures for hull bonuses and transfer modules What are you talking about? Is this some unofficial thing on Reddit? Because I see nothing in the forums where new stuff comes in (General Discussion, Information Portal, Features & Ideas). Nor any Devblog about it.
Citation required, Rain.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
I couldn't have said it better.
Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
|
xttz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
756
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:10:19 -
[4] - Quote
Well it's 'official' in the sense that it's on the test server: https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3ucoxo/stats_for_new_logi_frigs_on_sisi/ |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2466
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:20:46 -
[5] - Quote
The activation costs are mean.
252 up to 365 for T2 LAR? /Puke
Module cycle time all massively increased too.
|
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
220
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:42:38 -
[6] - Quote
The new rates are pretty similar to old. Slight increase in cap/s, but same hp/s.
The new cycle times are longer, though. In the armour case it's a lower fleet DPS threshold, but in the shield case it's not as apparent.
Cycle time does not matter for shield reps if you need to land them ASAP. Where it matters is bleeding into armour between cycles and switching targets. And here the new cycle time favours The Blob. Because in The Blob cycles are already effectively staggered because human factor, so it doesn't matter if the cycle is longer when HP/s is still the same, and reps still land every tick. While for small gang it's a straight nerf because worse staggering for you, solo logi scrub.
Also shield reps (and relevant ships) are rebalanced in CPU/PG, shifting in favour of more PG and less CPU (both ships and modules). While fleet setups like typical F1 5-1 basi are pretty much unaffected, I'm afraid of the possible effects on local active tank fits with downsized reps, since they were already tight on CPU, and for them local tank mods represent a bigger share of CPU use (though they still were full of RCUs and ACRs. Maybe they'll be fine using some co-processors and overclocking units instead, because lower pressure on PG). |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2466
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 19:51:58 -
[7] - Quote
Torgeir Hekard wrote:The new rates are pretty similar to old. Slight increase in cap/s, but same hp/s.
Yes, but a higher cap spike when they activate renders things much more vulnerable to cap warfare breaking the tipping point.
It's better for cap management to be 1gj/1second than 100gj/100s.
If you see what I mean. |
Chainsaw Plankton
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
2096
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 20:09:26 -
[8] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Khan Wrenth wrote:Rain6637 wrote:I just saw the new figures for hull bonuses and transfer modules What are you talking about? Is this some unofficial thing on Reddit? Because I see nothing in the forums where new stuff comes in (General Discussion, Information Portal, Features & Ideas). Nor any Devblog about it. Citation required, Rain. check sisi, and dev post will be coming later today. at least according to fozzie on the ccp twitch as of a few moments ago.
@ChainsawPlankto
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
32883
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 21:06:52 -
[9] - Quote
Capital transfer turrets would also be less effective on subcaps for the same reasons capital guns have bad application against subcaps. It solves a lot of issues and avoids sweeping, artificial rules like "cannot be applied to subcapitals."
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
32884
|
Posted - 2015.11.26 23:25:17 -
[10] - Quote
There's the situation where a subcap is perfectly still and receiving capital reps, but if that's true it can also receive capital damage. It seems fair and appropriate.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
|
Fat Buddah
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 09:52:23 -
[11] - Quote
Check out the new sticky. RR will have optimal and fall off. You are halfwy there. |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
32892
|
Posted - 2015.11.27 10:01:46 -
[12] - Quote
Fat Buddah wrote:Check out the new sticky. RR will have optimal and fall off. You are halfwy there. I realize that. Realized that. It's not halfway there, it's complicating things in a completely new direction, both in the coding required and balancing strategy.
The problem that remains with reps based solely on distance is the lack of a need to pilot manually. Anchor orbiting is still viable if all that matters is distance.
This reminds me of the wormhole overhaul that was proposed, which would have taken six months and still be an unwieldy bit of code that wouldn't lend itself to being balanced.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |