Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
George Gouillot
Black Fox Marauders
103
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 07:07:22 -
[61] - Quote
Good for LS exploration, lower stats do not matter as the sites are so easy, you cannot fail them even without bonus. 1 Free midslot = 1 scram.
|
Tristan Agion
Viziam Amarr Empire
138
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 08:17:16 -
[62] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:You can address this by rarity (and hence price). High-grade Slave Alpha is strictly better than a +4 learning implant. If both are available to you, you would always use the Slave. But the Slave costs a lot to lose. True enough. If you fly an exploration frigate with SoE launchers and probes, plus a similarly high price combined analyser, then you become a juicy and easy target. So there's a trade-off in bling fitting between better stats and higher risk.
However, the problem is that this pitches the new module at older players. It's not just that a newbie would have to save up for their first combined module. It's also the old adage of not flying what you cannot afford... Not only do older players have more spare cash, they also (generally) have more experience and are less likely to die in a bling fit.
I still think the best idea here is to only have combined modules in the future. That does not mean that relic and data sites become the same, it simply acknowledges the fact that we are playing the same underlying hack mini-game anyhow. The current situation is a bit like producing only computers with usb or thunderbolt ports, but not possibly with both, and considering it impossible to combine these ports into one device. Frankly, technology moves past such hurdles within a few years every time.
I also do not think that the boost of "gaining a mid-slot" will be overpowered for the vast majority of dual module users. Most will probably fit a Rangefinding or Pinpointing Array, or perhaps a Cargo Scanner. That will provide a small but entirely controlled advantage to them. For people that fly only one module now, it will mostly mean that instead of a relic analyser they will have a combined analyser and could theoretically also hack data sites. Again, that's not really a big deal.
So, just do the obvious here: fuse Tech 1 data and relic analysers into one Tech 1 analyser, do the same for Tech 2, and perhaps add some faction versions which for example trade CPU usage against hack stats.
It makes sense conceptually, it gives a mild but controlled boost to explorers (in particular newbie ones who can fit an additional array!), and it avoids the complications of making the combined module artificially competitive for explorers.
As for the skills, they don't actually have to be fused, at least not immediately! You could say that they represent the skills of applying the combined module to the specific case (data or relic). So depending on what kind of site you are in, you get the stats from the respective skill. |
Tristan Agion
Viziam Amarr Empire
138
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 08:38:48 -
[63] - Quote
George Gouillot wrote:Good for LS exploration, lower stats do not matter as the sites are so easy, you cannot fail them even without bonus. 1 Free midslot = 1 scram. And in what ship / fit are you going to make use of that? Most explorer frigates / covops are no good for a low sec fight. If you try this in an Astero or Stratios, then you still have weakened your combat setup by one mid slot (in which the combined analyser sits). Perhaps this works as "explorer, with opportunistic hunting of weaker explorers", but it does make you a juicy target more vulnerable to PVP. I don't think a Battle Heron works at all if you use up one mid slot for the combined analyser...
I think we would mostly see fits that currently have a relic analyser and combat modules updates to have a combined analyser and the same other modules. So that's potentially a bit more PVP pressure on data sites. Anyway, even if there are a few new exploration + combat fits, I don't think that they would be game-breaking good... |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2296
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 10:59:45 -
[64] - Quote
Make data sights worth it first
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
CCP RedDawn
C C P C C P Alliance
762
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 16:26:39 -
[65] - Quote
Looking through this thread, I'm going to up the Virus Strength of these modules to match their Tech I & II counterparts whilst keeping the other stats the same.
So now the:
GÇÿLigatureGÇÖ Integrated Analyzer will have a Virus Strength of 20 (from 15)
&
GÇÿZeugmaGÇÖ Integrated Analyzer will have a Virus Strength of 30 (from 20)
So both still have a slightly lower Coherence (10 for each) and 1 less Utility slot, but the same Strength. (All other stats remain the same as the Tech I & II variants)
Do these look slightly more desirable to you now?
Team Astro Sparkle
|
|
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere Coalition of the Unfortunate
1655
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 16:31:01 -
[66] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:Do these look slightly more desirable to you now?
Better, but depends entirely on how much they end up costing... they are mostly being fitted to frigates after all, and about the most pricey module people are willing to fit to them is a sisters launcher @ 40m. |
Scotsman Howard
S0utherN Comfort Circle-Of-Two
107
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 16:56:09 -
[67] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:Looking through this thread, I'm going to up the Virus Strength of these modules to match their Tech I & II counterparts whilst keeping the other stats the same. So now the: GÇÿLigatureGÇÖ Integrated Analyzer will have a Virus Strength of 20 (from 15) & GÇÿZeugmaGÇÖ Integrated Analyzer will have a Virus Strength of 30 (from 20) So both still have a slightly lower Coherence (10 for each) and 1 less Utility slot, but the same Strength. (All other stats remain the same as the Tech I & II variants) Do these look slightly more desirable to you now?
They definitely look much better now. For T3 Cruisers, this would make them worth considering (pricing considerations asside).
However, the min max player in me still thinks I will fit the standard T2 mods if I am going for a pure exploration (as in only data, relic, and sleeper caches) as in the high end ones you need as much coherence as possible.
Overall, much better. |
Damjan Fox
Fox Industries and Exploration
292
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 17:28:36 -
[68] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:So both still have a slightly lower Coherence (10 for each) and 1 less Utility slot, but the same Strength. (All other stats remain the same as the Tech I & II variants)
Do these look slightly more desirable to you now? Not just slightly, these stats look so much better now! Thank you RedDawn!
Edit: Is there an ETA for these modules? Or just "Soon(TM)"?
Proposal: >>> New Inventory / Item Hangar <<<
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
566
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 17:55:46 -
[69] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:Looking through this thread, I'm going to up the Virus Strength of these modules to match their Tech I & II counterparts whilst keeping the other stats the same.
So now the:
GÇÿLigatureGÇÖ Integrated Analyzer will have a Virus Strength of 20 (from 15)
&
GÇÿZeugmaGÇÖ Integrated Analyzer will have a Virus Strength of 30 (from 20)
So both still have a slightly lower Coherence (10 for each) and 1 less Utility slot, but the same Strength. (All other stats remain the same as the Tech I & II variants)
Do these look slightly more desirable to you now? Smile I think you spoiled us. I will put "Zeugma" on my T3 and never look back on T2 modules. What is the price tag for those?
"ItGÇÖs very important to note here that this means all the skillpoints available to buy on the market in EVE will have originated on other characters where they were trained at the normal rate."- CCP Rise on SP trading. Dailies for SP soon...
|
Jimy F
Aliastra Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2016.04.26 23:52:38 -
[70] - Quote
idea is nice, i dont have realy have time for reading all post so i just write what i think, if you make multihack thingy and it is faction it shoud have the same strengf then t2 versions, becouse it will be significly more expensive, if you make t2 version it is resonable it will have less strengh then t2 single spec hack modules, without facion single sepc hack modules in game wich should have better hack strengh, or less skill requirments with t2 stenght and smaller fitting requirmens, or bouth of this two characteristic. making muti spec wich be much more expensive and have smaller strength then t2 i think dont find almoust none customers and it will be waste of your work. |
|
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
209
|
Posted - 2016.04.27 17:54:24 -
[71] - Quote
It has been stated that EVE is about choices being made over how the player wants to proceed. The last thing you need is a "best" and "worst" choice. We have had too many of those. Personally I am very grateful for the module tiericide efforts to reduce the "no brainer" choice.
First, may I suggest chatting with the tiericde team to at least getting an idea to the philosophy of what they were doing. Should T1 modules not be the beginner modules? Then maybe a named mod followed by T2 then another named mod?
Second, research the lore. Why are we getting new modules? What npc corporations in EVE do the most exploration? Should the SoE have exploration related modules?
Third, its not the modules. Its the content. For example, all the new Citadel rigs, where are these dropping? How about the pirate faction capital ship BPCs? LP store? I hope not. Maybe we need more varied data sites (faction specific data sites that require faction specific modules or scripts).
Finally, new mods for the same task? That is fine but why not focus in iterating on what is already there? New mods for new types of hacking: Offensive Hacking. Hacking the tethering mechanic of a citadel to release all non piloted ships. Hacking dead towers to allow the play to scoop it. Hacking the moon mining arrays to allow the placing of siphons (that cannot be discovered through CREST). Hacking a titan to allow Project Nova troops to get in and online destroy modules.
I am all for adding game play not reducing it. Choosing to run only one site type for whatever reason is a choice. Using a mobile depot to swap modules is a choice. There was a time when exploration was complex game play requiring effort, practice and education for GREAT reward. The Odyssey expansion finished the dumbing down cycle of the entire profession and with it the value of the goods that made the effort of the old system(s) worth while. Please, please iterate to reward the experienced, knowledgeable explorer and give the new explorer something to strive for.
Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE
Check out the Eve-Prosper show for your market updates!
|
Sepheir Sepheron
The Congregation No Handlebars.
49
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 05:08:35 -
[72] - Quote
In my opinion make the normal modules do both, and make them into one module with keeping the strength the same.
If you guys insist on still making a new module with lower strength, consider making the fitting way higher instead of the lower strength because you need every bit of Coherence/Strength. It's not like exploration is especially lucrative now anyways unless you get extremely lucky and don't get ganked. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2930
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 17:41:53 -
[73] - Quote
I wouldn't use the lower one because it's so much worse than my t2 modules as to waste more of my time than running back home between sites to swap t2 modules. New players might use it, but only if it's as cheap as a meta module.
The higher one I might be interested in if it weren't very expensive. I don't think I could be persuaded to drop more than about 5 mil on one of those.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
665
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 20:40:09 -
[74] - Quote
Sorry if I missed it but what are the exact skill requirements to equip these? Does T2 strength require V in both hacking and archeology?
If the advanced one requires less than V/V then fitting these will be a no brainer compared to a 23 day train.
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
|
James Zimmer
Spooky Scary Militants DropBear Sanctuary
43
|
Posted - 2016.04.28 22:57:25 -
[75] - Quote
Personally, I wouldn't use them and here's why: I start exploration by filling my mids with scan mods, then I scan with the huge bonuses it provides and save bookmarks. Once I'm done scanning down everything in a system, I refit to hack mode with a data analyzer, a relic analyzer and a prop mod and get to hacking. At no point while I'm hacking do I need more than these 3 mids, and since all the exploration ships have at least 4 mids, freeing up a mid is entirely irrelevant to me.
The only thing that would tempt me into buying a pricey hacking module would be substantially higher hacking stats, or maybe equal stats and an extra chance to hack before the container explodes. |
Areen Sassel
90
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 02:33:11 -
[76] - Quote
Tristan Agion wrote:I think nobody has noted yet the proposed loss of a virus utility slot? That makes matters somewhat worse still.
People did, but I thought it was almost irrelevant. If you've got two utilities neither of which you had a compelling use for, you uncover a third, but then it ends up under a defensive node because you couldn't pick it up... this is not exactly likely, and
Changing the utility of the directional information might offer considerable scope for module differentiation. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
2533
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 05:11:53 -
[77] - Quote
Carbon Alabel wrote:I like the idea, but don't see myself using them as I don't consider the extra mid slot to be worth the significant decrease in virus strength.
I am in this situation.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
|
CCP RedDawn
C C P C C P Alliance
766
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 10:03:50 -
[78] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Carbon Alabel wrote:I like the idea, but don't see myself using them as I don't consider the extra mid slot to be worth the significant decrease in virus strength. I am in this situation.
In the earlier posts I mention that I've increased the Strength values to the same as the Tech I and Tech II variants. I've also updated the initial post.
These new analyzers now only have 1 less utility slot, less Coherence and a higher CPU requirement.
Team Astro Sparkle
|
|
Aivlis Eldelbar
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Curatores Veritatis Alliance
165
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 10:51:01 -
[79] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:FT Diomedes wrote:Carbon Alabel wrote:I like the idea, but don't see myself using them as I don't consider the extra mid slot to be worth the significant decrease in virus strength. I am in this situation. In the earlier posts I mention that I've increased the Strength values to the same as the Tech I and Tech II variants. I've also updated the initial post. These new analyzers now only have 1 less utility slot, less Coherence and a higher CPU requirement.
Then they will obsolete the current ones, making exploration even easier, sadly.
I am very rarely constrained by the number of utility slots, as most consumables can be activated right away. Neither am I pressed for mids, to be honest, but I see how this could lower the barrier of entry even more, allowing low-skill players to compensate by fitting a scan enhancing midslot module.
I'm going to sound like a bittervet here, but hear me out: I liked exploration because it rewarded curiosity and not that many people had the spatial awareness to probe with the old system, or the desire to carry a probe launcher to even know that there were sigs in system, or, crucially, the desire to train for a covops to be effective at it, which was promptly fixed by easy-mode SOE ships. Nowadays it's not worth my time because the Odyssey expansion made it an entry-level occupation in EVE and the prices for the loot crashed spectacularly.
The sleeper sites helped mitigate that, but dual-purpose analyzers would be a direct counter to that, as they would allow under-equipped explorers to access them, whereas before they would often pass due to lacking a data module or due to the time required to swap back and forth.
tl;dr, I'm not intrinsically against dual-purpose analyzers, but I am concerned that they would lower the fitting and ship requirement barrier even lower. Relic-hunting interceptors are an actual thing in New Eden right now, think on that before you make it any easier to scan and hack.
|
Zappity
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2845
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 11:23:03 -
[80] - Quote
I like this idea. Data and Relic analysers as separate modules for what is exactly the same role (hacking a little can) has always struck me as a bit daft. There is no real choice to be made, especially now after the advent of mobile depots.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
|
|
Tristan Agion
Viziam Amarr Empire
141
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 11:33:24 -
[81] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:In the earlier posts I mention that I've increased the Strength values to the same as the Tech I and Tech II variants. I've also updated the initial post. These new analyzers now only have 1 less utility slot, less Coherence and a higher CPU requirement. What is your reasoning for not simply combining current Tech I Data/Relic into one combined scanner, and likewise for Tech II, and then leave room for future faction (combined) scanners on top of these?
I would bet a considerable amount of money that most active explorers would prefer that. And no, not just because they get a "free mid slot". Again, for most exploration fits that mid slot really doesn't matter all that much. It would mostly help low skill players, who can add another array. Maybe some unified fits can become viable that before required switching via a mobile depot. And a few people who now have only a relic analyser fitted will then also be able to access data sites. That's about it.
Indeed, you can de facto suppress the "mid slot advantage" by raising the fitting requirements in CPU/PG enough over the straight addition of requirements for the separated module. Though I really don't think that this indirect boost to mostly explorer and covops frigates is overpowered at all.
I think a straight up fuse would make sense conceptually (lore-technologically), would acknowledge that there really is only one mini-game to be played here, would be in line with recent CCP tiercide, and importantly would give you much more interesting future options with proper faction gear. |
Circumstantial Evidence
307
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 13:08:52 -
[82] - Quote
Tristan Agion wrote:CCP RedDawn wrote:In the earlier posts I mention that I've increased the Strength values to the same as the Tech I and Tech II variants. I've also updated the initial post. These new analyzers now only have 1 less utility slot, less Coherence and a higher CPU requirement. What is your reasoning for not simply combining current Tech I Data/Relic into one combined scanner, and likewise for Tech II, and then leave room for future faction (combined) scanners on top of these? CCP RedDawn wrote:* In regards to the overall combination of both data and relic sites, I'd much rather introduce a higher level of variance to both of the hacking variations overall than combine them together. The hacking game itself has so much more depth potential which I wish to revisit in the future And so, we just have to hold on to hope that CCP RedDawn eventually gets the go-ahead to add some new variations to the data and relic puzzle mechanics.
With the module revisions, I will definitely be interested in them. Same strength, Less coherence ... more risk of losing some loot when taking a bad path, but still gives a fighting chance. Coherence is a good statistic to balance on.
For general low and null sites I might stop using the T2 parts. I've lost ships misjudging the superior sleeper cache, we asked for more complication and got it, lol. So I leave that one alone. More loot for someone else ;) |
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1496
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 13:40:12 -
[83] - Quote
I'm afraid I have to agree with the majority here. Having as much virus strength as possible is my number one priority. I can always use a depot to swap modules, and most covops frigates have plenty of mid-slots and CPU, so long as they do not have an expanded probe launcher fit.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Ransu Asanari
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
497
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 18:28:20 -
[84] - Quote
First off, thank you CCP RedDawn for following up on your commitment to improving exploration sites. I can see that you definitely did follow through with looking into ways of making the High-Tech items useful, and I appreciate that. I hope we can continue to see iterations to make Data Sites more profitable, and bring them up to a level where they would be desired to be run at the same rate as Relic sites.
Making a Storyline hacking module makes sense to me, as does using the High-Tech items. Now the patchnotes where the High-Tech item drop rate was significantly reduced makes sense.
That said, I don't think combining the module in this manner is a good idea. If there are plans to diverge the Data and Relic site minigames even more or improve on them, having the separate modules will make more sense going forward as well.
Reducing the effectiveness of the Data/Relic Analyzer by reducing the coherence means you have less capability to run the higher end sites, like the Sleeper Cache sites. We are already taking a reduction in effectiveness by having to fly an Astero or Stratios/T3 to run the Sleeper Cache sites for tank. And that's exactly when you'd need a combined module like this.
Personally I wouldn't ever use this module when I can just swap for the T2 modules for max strength and coherence.
Instead, can I suggest creating separate Data and Relic Analyzer Storyline modules that have a more "compact" fitting? This would follow along the same Tiercide path as other Storyline items. And as a special ability, if possible, give them an increased range to loot from hacked cans. Right now the modules operate at 5000m or 6000m (I'm not sure why one is lower), but you still have to get within 2500m to loot from a can. Typically I keep at range on a container at 2200m while I hack so I can still cloak if I get dropped on, and I can also loot.
Being able to hack and loot at a longer range gives more flexibility in the site to avoid other obstacles that can decloak you, improves quality of life, and makes navigating easier for less experienced explorers. That would make the Storyline modules very desirable, in my opinion. |
Ransu Asanari
V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA
497
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 18:43:03 -
[85] - Quote
If you are looking for things we could potentially do for other improvements to Exploration, can I suggest the following:
- Seprate "Sisters of EVE" or "Society of Concious Thought" Faction Data/Relic Analyzers which have the same Virus Strength as T2, but less coherence, and take more CPU, like you originally proposed. This would give an option to newer players who can pay more for the modules, but haven't trained for the T2 modules yet.
- Inventable T2 Core Scanner Probes, and T2 Combat Scanner Probes. I'm not sure why the SoE Faction and RSS Storyline versions are the only options for these. Why don't we have a T2 variant for the probes themselves?
- Midslot "Archaeology" and "Hacking" Arrays which provide additional Virus Coherence. These would be similar to the Scan Acquisition/Rangefinding/Pinpointing Arrays, which use the Spatial Attunement Unit (only in the T2) which drop from Data/Relic Sites. Maybe we can find more uses for them here, and for the High-Tech items? I like that Virus Strength is limited by your skills and the hull, but this might give more interesting choices than always using rigs like Memetic Algorithm Bank and Emission Scope Sharpener to increase coherence, and give the players more choice to have to constantly refit different arrays for different tasks, or be worse at either scanning, hacking data sites, or hacking relic sites.
- Long Term - Potentially Advanced Archaology and Advanced Hacking skills and modules and sites that require them? The skill tree for this activity does include all of the scanning skills, and tanking skills to run the harder sites like the Gas sites and Sleeper Cache/Ghost sites. The Drifter Wormholes also require a good mix of offensive and defensive skills, as well as hacking. Just something to think about.
|
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
209
|
Posted - 2016.04.29 18:56:46 -
[86] - Quote
Ransu Asanari wrote:If you are looking for things we could potentially do for other improvements to Exploration, can I suggest the following:
- Seprate "Sisters of EVE" or "Society of Concious Thought" Faction Data/Relic Analyzers which have the same Virus Strength as T2, but less coherence, and take more CPU, like you originally proposed. This would give an option to newer players who can pay more for the modules, but haven't trained for the T2 modules yet.
- Inventable T2 Core Scanner Probes, and T2 Combat Scanner Probes. I'm not sure why the SoE Faction and RSS Storyline versions are the only options for these. Why don't we have a T2 variant for the probes themselves?
- Midslot "Archaeology" and "Hacking" Arrays which provide additional Virus Coherence. These would be similar to the Scan Acquisition/Rangefinding/Pinpointing Arrays, which use the Spatial Attunement Unit (only in the T2) which drop from Data/Relic Sites. Maybe we can find more uses for them here, and for the High-Tech items? I like that Virus Strength is limited by your skills and the hull, but this might give more interesting choices than always using rigs like Memetic Algorithm Bank and Emission Scope Sharpener to increase coherence, and give the players more choice to have to constantly refit different arrays for different tasks, or be worse at either scanning, hacking data sites, or hacking relic sites.
- Long Term - Potentially Advanced Archaology and Advanced Hacking skills and modules and sites that require them? The skill tree for this activity does include all of the scanning skills, and tanking skills to run the harder sites like the Gas sites and Sleeper Cache/Ghost sites. The Drifter Wormholes also require a good mix of offensive and defensive skills, as well as hacking. Just something to think about.
Interestingly I was thinking along the same lines. We have scanning mid slot modules now so why not strength/coherence increasing mid slot mods too; computer enhancements for the hacking modules.
Now I can choose if I want a relic hunting cepter with a mid slot or two to boost the hacking module or do I want both hacking modules with each being bonused for sleeper caches or some other combination. Or maybe I want to specialize further for a specific goal maximizing strength through skills and modules.
Choice, flexibility and game play with site iteration and evolution.
Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE
Check out the Eve-Prosper show for your market updates!
|
Dino Zavr
Shadow Owls
80
|
Posted - 2016.04.30 10:14:25 -
[87] - Quote
Good idea.
ATM i fly interceptor with only T2 Relic Analyzer fitted as i hardly ever sacrifice my warp scrambler for Data Analyzer It would be great if you implement the whole line of faction & storyline (or even dedspace and officer) scanning modules Definitely it would be a matter of risk and choise to fit cheap or very expansive hardware to an exploration boat.
Thanks |
Gustins
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1
|
Posted - 2016.05.11 09:09:18 -
[88] - Quote
Sorry if this has already been mentioned.. How about leaving lower stats as described (lower then T1/T2 analyzers), but add scripts that would minimize effects done by defensive subsystems (i.e. reduced virus suppressor coherence or less coherence restored by restoration node etc.)? |
Trespasser
S0utherN Comfort Circle-Of-Two
56
|
Posted - 2016.05.11 13:25:01 -
[89] - Quote
Honestly i feel you should just get rid of the "specialized" versions and just replace them with these Multi-use version.
|
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
216
|
Posted - 2016.05.11 17:42:43 -
[90] - Quote
Trespasser wrote:Honestly i feel you should just get rid of the "specialized" versions and just replace them with these Multi-use version.
There was a time when the "specialized" versions where of serious consequence in exploration. The profession has radically changed since then. While the module tiericide made many improvements and eliminated many modules, removing the "specialized" hacking modules is short sighted. Many of the eliminated modules through tiericide were redundant; there was no additional game play or reasonable choice to be had. Exploration has choice and reasonable game play.
I believe the way forward is to expand the content that is dependent upon these modules. Additional meta modules will expand choice of how this content can be tackled.
With the perspective of time, the efforts that were made to make scanning easier has made this profession's sandbox smaller and much less lucrative. It has become a simple beginners profession. Those of us that were dedicated explorers from 8 or more years ago have either moved on to other things, do it for relaxation or focused on combat exploration.
Food for though, combat exploration has not been iterated on since its introduction. Sleeper sites were a welcome breath of fresh air. Iteration is the key to prosperity now. Not the removal of profession based modules.
Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE
Check out the Eve-Prosper show for your market updates!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |