| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Opertone
Caldari
Rulers Of Mankind
    |
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:18:00 -
[1]
is a new topic, that has been long on people mind
'augmented' acolytes are a good example of tech 3 drones... check the item info on 'augmented' and integrated info
why not make tech 3 items come from dedspace, complexes and exploration?
to make an augmented acolyte you need special materials and the BPC, why not make tech 3 from special exploration loot, just like data interfaces and augmented drones.
in my opinion augmented drones also need a better damage multipliers, or 5 more damage points compared to tech 2 drones
tech 3 items should be slightly better than tech 2, just like the 'augmented' acolytes, more hitpoints for heat damage, less heat exposure, better other parameters, maybe they should be close to quality faction items, then getting them will be hard, and they will have a high cost.
for example a tech 3 BCU should have 12.5 % damage bonus like a caldary navy BCU, but it should have twice as many hitpoints, so when you overload your lows, the BCU does't get offline as fast.
maybe tech 3 guns can have some adavantages, smaller signature radius or less capacitor use... whatever is in-line with racial philosophy in that field.
missile launchers can hold more ammunition, generate less heat, be slighty overlocked.
corsair overcloaked memory is a good example of tech 3 RAM for computers... it has heat sinks and is clocked quite faster than regular DDR II or DDR III
basically tech 3 items should be the itens with fine-tuned parameters, special items that recieve 'better than normal' grade in the Qaulity Control test...
i think that tech 3 items should require some science and thermodynamics skills, like those used in the invention, for example the 125 mm rail guns requires hydramagnetic physics for invention, this skill should be a lvl 4 requirement for tech 3 rail gun
example, tech 3 autocannon should have better parameters, fall-off, tracking, capacity, ammo compatibility, have better heat emission, be skill intensive, require nuclear physics 4, be better on fittings, come from space exploration
|
Hank Soral
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:53:00 -
[2]
"tech" items are intended to have a good cost/performance ratio. There's no reason for tech 3 to be more expensive than faction/complex mods. As such, they would also have to outperform faction mods, which would dissolve any use of faction modules.
Bad change is bad.
|
SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:58:00 -
[3]
I suggest not introducing them.
Making the skill tree taller has even more potential balance issues than making it wider.
EVE RELATED CONTENT |
Guer
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:58:00 -
[4]
no
|
Decaying Youth
RaVeN Alliance
Scalar Federation
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 22:59:00 -
[5]
think u guys just jumping in saying, OMG don't do this.. are just idiots.
EVE needs development so tech 3 MUST happen for the game to survive, otherwise theres nothing for people to work for.. people who play the game for a specific part of it, say PvP, will not train and train for ship and modules, reach a point where they're happy and move to industry skills.. they just wouldnt waste the time
(obviously this example is far stretched cause of the race based skills, but it gives u the idea)..
Tech 3 will be the future and it will happen, it will jsut need to be VERY well thought out.. As far as FACTION loot goes, faction loot is based on Tech II items being improved.. The dribble about "ooo, faction will be obscelete" is just nonsence.. obviously the simple solution there is factions would adapt their fittings to tech III spec.. so faction loot would stay the best.. tech II faction loot could remain as it is so that folks with the modules could continue using it.. and tech III would be speced based around the current faction loot..
so its simply just adding another run in the ladder,
Tech I
Tech I named
Tech II
Tech II named (what we currently know as faction loot)
Tech III
You could then have faction loot above that.. Its hardly a BAD idea and you then have ever MORE choice and option with fittings, so it the game continues to be more and more individualised..
you guys saying, oh no tech III are like old grandpa and grandma jeriatrics who say computers are the devil..
|
Valenthra
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 23:07:00 -
[6]
CCP said Tech 3 won't be better then Tech 2 most cases or even Tech 1.
The point of Tech 3 is suppose too be superb heat resistance for thermodynamics...
|
Decaying Youth
RaVeN Alliance
Scalar Federation
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 23:16:00 -
[7]
 Originally by: Valenthra
CCP said Tech 3 won't be better then Tech 2 most cases or even Tech 1.
The point of Tech 3 is suppose too be superb heat resistance for thermodynamics...
are we talking overheating? if this is the case, whats the point in them? if they're looking at something along those lines, i would think mayb lookin at cap intensive fittings, say nano's or SB's, could have an overdrive function, that uses no cap and gives a 100% increase for one cycle say, but can only be used once until recharged..
have a consumable that powers the overdrive for each module, like an ore that u "inject" into the module..
it sings "more skills" and would give another direction and element to modules use
|
Decaying Youth
RaVeN Alliance
Scalar Federation
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 23:18:00 -
[8]
**editted cause 1 sentence didnt make sense**
Originally by: Decaying Youth
Originally by: Valenthra
CCP said Tech 3 won't be better then Tech 2 most cases or even Tech 1.
The point of Tech 3 is suppose too be superb heat resistance for thermodynamics...
are we talking overheating? if this is the case, whats the point in them if your not going to see benefits greater than whats available? especially if ur talkin bout something that needs more training that tech 1 stuff..
if they're looking at something along those lines, i would think mayb lookin at cap intensive fittings, say nano's or SB's, could have an overdrive function, that uses no cap and gives a 100% increase for one cycle say, but can only be used once until recharged..
have a consumable that powers the overdrive for each module, like an ore that u "inject" into the module..
it sings "more skills" and would give another direction and element to modules use
|
Asestorian
Domination.
Scorched Earth.
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 23:29:00 -
[9]
In an issue of EON, before heat was introduced, the CCP person being interviewed for the article stated that their idea for Tech III was not to make it inherently better than Tech II, but rather allow it to be overheated for a lot longer, giving the temporary boosts with less risk of disabling the modules.
Whether this is still their intention I don't know, but they are surely going to be wary of making Tech III just plain better than Tech II, when Tech II already takes a good bit of time to train for a new player. They won't want to increase that gap too much.
---
MOZO
|
Opertone
Caldari
Rulers Of Mankind
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 23:57:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Decaying Youth
think u guys just jumping in saying, OMG don't do this.. are just idiots.
EVE needs development so tech 3 MUST happen for the game to survive, otherwise theres nothing for people to work for.. people who play the game for a specific part of it, say PvP, will not train and train for ship and modules, reach a point where they're happy and move to industry skills.. they just wouldnt waste the time
(obviously this example is far stretched cause of the race based skills, but it gives u the idea)..
Tech 3 will be the future and it will happen, it will jsut need to be VERY well thought out.. As far as FACTION loot goes, faction loot is based on Tech II items being improved.. The dribble about "ooo, faction will be obscelete" is just nonsence.. obviously the simple solution there is factions would adapt their fittings to tech III spec.. so faction loot would stay the best.. tech II faction loot could remain as it is so that folks with the modules could continue using it.. and tech III would be speced based around the current faction loot..
so its simply just adding another run in the ladder,
Tech I
Tech I named
Tech II
Tech II named (what we currently know as faction loot)
Tech III
You could then have faction loot above that.. Its hardly a BAD idea and you then have ever MORE choice and option with fittings, so it the game continues to be more and more individualised..
you guys saying, oh no tech III are like old grandpa and grandma jeriatrics who say computers are the devil..
eve needs to advance and tech 3 should be a new level, it should not only come through high science skills like tech 2, but rather cosmos exploration or agent LP rewards...
very good point above, we need advance futher to something better, right now tech 2 is absolete... for nano fits onyl faction mods count any more, tech 3 must be science skill intensive and have adavantages over tech 2, tech 3 must come through exploration and a lot of skills, then it becomes a new level.
tech 2 BPO are somethign that gives unfair competition, rare moons even harden the competition...
need suggestions about tech 3 stuff, not just saying yes or no...
keep on good post
|
|
xHalcyonx
Amarr
Wreckless Abandon
Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 00:27:00 -
[11]
Edited by: xHalcyonx on 10/03/2008 00:27:44
Tech 1
Tec 1 'Named'
Tech 2
Tech 2 'Named' (certain modules like this already exist: see smokescreen cov ops cloak)
Tech 3 (IIRC from what a dev said it is slightly less powered than T2, but can overheat FAR longer)
Tech 3 'Named'(?)
Faction
Deadspace
Officer
-------------------
ნỊs uʍop əpỊsdn
Support the introduction of Blaze M crystals for Amarr! |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
Night's Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 00:30:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Opertone
eve needs to advance and tech 3 should be a new level, it should not only come through high science skills like tech 2, but rather cosmos exploration or agent LP rewards...
No. We do NOT need to rely on mission farming/etc to get T3 gear
Originally by: Opertone
very good point above, we need advance futher to something better, right now tech 2 is absolete... for nano fits onyl faction mods count any more, tech 3 must be science skill intensive and have adavantages over tech 2, tech 3 must come through exploration and a lot of skills, then it becomes a new level.
LOL, T2 is obsolete? Yeah, right.
For nano-fits, only faction mods count any more.... oh, wait. Vagabonds load faction ammo in their faction guns. Oh, wait.
Faction mods are for pimping, and that's it, otherwise we could argue that there are no nano-ships because everyone has overheated domi webs, right? 
T3 having a lot of advantages over T2 would be bad as well; the idea with overheating/etc which CCP has is probably best.
Making T3 the requirement to be effective and T2 the absolute minimum is just bad for the game.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
SoftRevolution
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 00:33:00 -
[13]
Quote:
Making T3 the requirement to be effective and T2 the absolute minimum is just bad for the game.
It seems that if they put T3 in and give it a big skill overhead they're more or less forced into making that the case though 
EVE RELATED CONTENT |
Grendelsbane
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 02:40:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Grendelsbane on 10/03/2008 02:40:58
Originally by: Opertone
EVE needs development
Why? Nothing for people to work for? Nonsense. Do we need to raise the level cap and put out more "epic loot" for you? How about doing something constructive in the game universe other than simply aiming for the newest, most expensive nano-solo-pwnmobile?
If T2 BPO's give "unfair competition" and T2 is now "obselete", if you just keep doing more of the same you'll have the exact same gripes with the "new" stuff. In any event, the statement that "only faction mods count for nano fits" is just silly.
If you're essentially going to have the "new expensive stuff" and "older, cheaper stuff", and the performance ratio of the new "old" to "new" stuff is going to be similar, why bother reinventing the wheel?
I say put the effort into new environments and functionality. We have simple caricatures of "electronic warfare" and "defensive weapons systems", and solar systems that are basically all the exact same thing with the planets, backgrounds, and rats shuffled around. How bout we fix that before handing out new epeen modules that work in the same silly way?
CCP has a chronic problem coming up with weapon systems that no one - not even a hypothetical, fictional EVE character - would actually want to use. They'd look at the stuff and say, "crap, this isn't worth the bother", just like a lot of EVE pilots do.
I mean, seriously, look at, say, defenders - Yes, wonderful idea! We'll put Ensign Ricky over here by the porthole with a pair of binoculars, and every time he sees what might or might not be a missile coming at us, he can jam on this here tiny button, which may or may not launch a missile which may or may not intercept and destroy it! Brilliant! Those Caldaris are really screwed now!
T2 ammo! Did they honestly try to come up with the most annoying nerfs for each of these that they could? As if the increased fitting reqs and ammo and launchers costing 10x somehow doesn't quite do the job - hello opportunity cost! One or the other would be fine but combining the two simply makes it so that you have to be brain dead to use most of those ammo types.
ECM, bursts, sensor stuff.. argh, go read some Tom Clancy or something; I suggest "Red Storm Rising" (pay close attention in regards to the Defenders as well). Being more effective than the other things I've griped about doesn't make half of it less silly.
If you ask me, a few too many people have been taking the easy way out and simply slapping sci-fi gloss over hack-and-slash fantasy gameplay mechanics. CCP works hard but, I think, needs even more hard work to really hit greatness.
Obviously I do play EVE, of course, despite my negativity, but as much as I like the guys I fly with, it's because there aren't really any alternatives if I don't feel like playing some smelly arse barbarian with silly horns on his hat.
|
Lance Fighter
Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 03:50:00 -
[15]
I personally think the only thing t3 will be good for is when you use them overheated. Without the overheating, it is between t1 and t2. With overheating, it will EASILY preform better than faction, but for limited time. This type of module becomes more viable in a pvp type encounter, and less viable when you need the modules used on a consistent basis, like in missions or ratting.
Ive noticed that 99.9% of people on these forums have a signature. If you are one of the 0.1% that doesnot have a sig, copy this into your sig, and display your defiance towards people with sigs. |
Opertone
Caldari
Rulers Of Mankind
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 11:07:00 -
[16]
not many people would bother to get tech 3 if it is 100% dependant on thermodynamics
tech 3 will be desirable if it is in some sustainable way better than tech 2, it also needs to be hard to train, ie require lots of science skills... Maybe tech 3 modules can self repair after combat... but what about modules like armor plates and shield extenders? in what way can they be used with thermodynamics? in my opinion a tech 3 shield extender must give a little more shield bonues than a tech 2, but be very rare, hard to make and require a lot of skills.
if tech 3 is cheap and purely for PVP, then noone will bother to train for it. Simply because there is no need, as PVP ships die anyway... Yes, tech 3 must be something special.
like augmented acolytes, maybe comparable to ded space items, especially when overheated, it must be something cool to have, and hard to come by, both ISK and skill wise
|
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |