| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Topic |
Aarin Wrath
Caldari
    |
Posted - 2008.09.10 15:34:00 -
[91]
Modules:
- Drone link augmenter.
- Drone navigation computer.
- Omni directional tracking link.
- Any Capital Level module. (Armor repairer, Shield booster, Shield/Armor/Energy transfer, Triage Module, Siege Module, etc ...)
- XL Ammo (there are a couple of exceptions)
- Fighters (Carrier)
- Warfare Links
- Containers
- Ice Miner
Problem:
- No T2 Variants.
- No 'Named' Varriants.
Solution:
Create some and add to loot tables? (non-t2 stuff)
Make T2 items inventable.
Note: I know Containers seems an odd addition, but T2 Giant Containers which hold say 10% more than normal containers would be a nice addition to the industrialists out there.
Note: Yes there are T2 Ice Strip miners, but there are no meta-level ones.
Module: Shield boost augmentation implant (I forget the name, sorry)
Problem: Does not work with capital level shield boosters.
Solution: Fix the bug.
Module: Draftsman Implants
Problem: Dont work (this may have been fixed, not 100% certain)
Solution: Fix the bug.
|
Anti Protagonist
Hiro Trade and Logistics
|
Posted - 2008.09.10 15:42:00 -
[92]
 Originally by: Batolemaeus
Module: Micro cap-booster, Micro cap battery etc.
Problem: t1 Bpos not seeded
Suggested fix: Seed them!
Other notes: There are some fitting where they are useful, mainly on small ships like interceptors. One of my raptor fittings would really make use of a micro cap booster, but they are hard to come by in bulk.
The BPOs used to exist (I had a micro cap injector one). They were all changed to the "small" version a few patches ago. Back when they changed the Expanded Cargohold I BPOs to Expanded Cargohold IIs.  |
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2008.09.11 13:49:00 -
[93]
Module: Shield boosters/armour reppers
Problem: Active tanking is virtually dead in PVP, because of focus fire, overwhelming DPS and buffer tanks. This has reduced variety and is a serious problem for ships with active-tank bonuses.
Suggested fix: We can't boosting active tanking in general, because it screws up PVE balance. Instead, boost the overheating bonus to boosters/reppers, so they are better at tanking brief periods of high DPS. This won't affect PVE balance, which is concerned with sustainable tank, nor will it affect active tanks in 1v1s, as the same limitations of capacitor and module burnout will still apply.
|
linkeleo
Fairlight Corp
FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.09.13 13:48:00 -
[94]
Module: Shield boosters
Problem: When compared with armor repairers - shield boosters have a system much as described in the speed nerf blog, where there are multiple tiers of unstacked bonus modifiers.
Firstly - Shield Boost amplifiers, the only equivalent option for an armor tank is Auxiliary nano pump rigs, these rigs have much lower bonus's compared to boost amps and use valuble rig slots, also this reduces a players options once they have fitted rigs. also in capital ships, shield boost amp gives bonus to capital rep amount. Aux nano pump does not. another problem with these modules is that a player can choose to offset and exceed the shield boost penalty created by fitting a cap power relay by using a boost amp. this is a real problem because a lot of the hardwiring for increasing rep amounts / reducing cycle times seem non-applicable to capital reps.
Secondly - the issues in my first point (sub capital) are only multiplied when people use Crystal implants. They get vastly more Hp/cap than armor reps, and therefore a much greater Sustainable tank. Armor reps have no implant set to increase the sustainable tank, only overall hitpoints.
Thirdly - on top of all this, shield boosters have instant effect and half the cycle time of armor reps. this is more of a problem for sub capital ships that use armor because it makes them much more vulnerable to high amounts of alpha strike (which, we can all see - is only something that is going to worsen with time) it is possible to counteract this somewhat by using a double repair setup - but this is imo often a somewhat forced and unfair use of extra low slot.
Fourthly - Shield rigs give the option of: cycle time reduction (same as nanobot accelerators for armor) but also 'capacitor safeguard' which reduces the capacitor use of a shield booster which only serves to worsen points one and two. armor does not have this option. shields also have the armor equiv of trimarks - 'core defense field extender'. this means a shield boosting pilot can increase his hp (same as an armor tanked pilot can with slave implants and trimarks) which again raises the issue that the shield implant set gives increased rep amount, giving the option of the shield tanker to do both hp boost with rigs and rep amount with implants - where armor only has the trimark option (regen plates are broken as already agreed)
Suggested fix: complete overhaul of either shield boosters or armor reps, and rebalance of the tiers of items that effect their function, or at least bring out some new modules / implant options for armor tanks.
Other notes: in eft a wyvern in triage with best modules can permatank 77957 dps this is almost double the attainable amount of any other capital ship in game, seems to be inline with the fact that armor rep cycle times are twice that of shield reps.
***
Also broken:
Ship: Retribution
Problem: 1 mid slot WTF
suggested fix: add an extra mid slot and remove a low slot
would be really nice to see some consideration / investigation of the shield boosters vs armor reps issues..
Linkeleo
----------------------------------------------
 |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2008.09.13 15:08:00 -
[95]
thing:
optimal rigs
problem:
no stacking
example:
1 pulse apoc + 1 scimi/onei = 600dps @ 170km & 0.04219rad
2 beam apocs = 700 dps @ 160km & 0.00435rad
fix:
cpt. obvious
-
 putting the gist back into logistics |
Ethen Bejorn
Pestilent Industries Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.09.13 16:48:00 -
[96]
Problem Item: Naglfar
Problem: Longest To Train For Worst Dread Once Trained.
Solutions: Citadel Torps Need More Hit Points. Naglfar needs more tank and more gank.
|
AshtarDJ
Filthy Scum
|
Posted - 2008.09.15 14:10:00 -
[97]
Module: ECM (falcons)
Problem: Too overpowered as it is now when a single well skilled falcon can keep 2-4 BSs perma-jammed during an entire fight. Big problem for small/medium sized gang engagements.
Fix: ECM mods need a stack nerf. Using 3 ECMs, they will work as they work today, using 4 would be worse, but still ok, 5 or more would make them almost completely worthless.
Notes: Note that I only mentioned falcons here. Since they got the same bonuses as the rook, they became overpowered (I've flown falcons for 2 years and know the ship very well), not because of the bonuses, but because it can use all it's 7 mid AND lows + rig slots for ECM. Blackbirds, scorpions and rooks aren't really a problem today because they are often closer to the fight or even in the middle of it and because of that they need to use other mods such as tank, ECCM, MWD and even maybe a warp disruptor, leaving them with 3-4 mid slots for ECM (witch is fair in a fight). Limiting falcons to 3-4 jammers would still keep them useful in a fight, but not overpowered. The stack nerf would need to go thru to ECCM aswell, otherwise falcons would fit 3 jammers, 3-4 ECCMs and be pretty much unjammable.
|
AshtarDJ
Filthy Scum
|
Posted - 2008.09.15 14:48:00 -
[98]
Edited by: AshtarDJ on 15/09/2008 14:51:50
"Module": Jita (sorry, delete if it's too off topic)
Problem: Too "confy" to always go to the same place to buy and sell anything knowing that 95% of the cases you are getting the best prices in Eve. As a result: Too many people and too many market transactions in one system = laaaaag
Fix: Make all 4 factions "promote" what is specific for that faction by increasing the taxes (by let's say 15%) on all market + contract transactions of anything that is specific for the other factions.
Example: While you are in caldari space, all caldari ships and caldari specific mods (such as missiles, hybrids, ECM, etc) will cost as much as they cost today, but if you want to buy a tempest in caldari space, the "state" will charge you an additional tax of 15% (or charge the one who's selling it). So you either have to pay more for that tempest, or you have to fly over to minmatar space to buy that ship for a normal price.
"Generic mods" such as reppers and hardeners will have the same tax everywhere, but anything that is more race specific (such as lasers, NOS, neuts, tracking disruptors and offcourse amarr ships for amarr), will only be cheap within the space of that faction.
Note: That will split Jita into 4 big market hubs instead of 1. Forcing the traders to travel more to buy/sell ships and mods for the optimal prices.
Isn't this in line with your faction warfare?
|
AshtarDJ
Filthy Scum
|
Posted - 2008.09.15 15:42:00 -
[99]
Module: Pulse lasers
Problem: The have good DPS, very good range and very good tracking.
Fix: One of them has got to go. I suggest the tracking.
Note: Blasters have good DPS, bad range and really bad tracking.
ACs have decent DPS, decent tracking and really good range (due to the falloff).
Pulse lasers have the "cap issue", but it only shows in the really long engagements when the pilot runs out of cap boosters.
|
Aarin Wrath
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.09.15 16:11:00 -
[100]
Originally by: AshtarDJ
Edited by: AshtarDJ on 15/09/2008 14:51:50
"Module": Jita (sorry, delete if it's too off topic)
Mods please delete AshtarDJ's post. It's way off topic. He should have made a seperate post in Features and Ideas.
(Complaining about Jita is NO WAY related to problem modules within Eve.)
Please stay on topic folks.
|
|
Silvana Kor'ah
|
Posted - 2008.09.17 14:12:00 -
[101]
Module: Deadspace small/medium shield transporters (small deadspace armor reppers likewise)
Problem: unbalanced and totally useless; eat up way too much CPU and activation energy for just a minor boost or range bonus (especially the small ones)
Fix: just play a bit with the values, there are plenty of em. Fe. compared to T2
- better range, more CPU req., same boost ammount like T2
- better range, less boost ammount, same CPU
- same range, better boost
- same range, less cpu
- less range, ...
- or even heat damage modifiers!
Other Notes:
Basically, i think that the small transporters (and remote armor reppers as well) should have their range increased. They will be used on frigates which go fast, therefore one runs out of range pretty quick. This would imho also be logical. Large ammounts can only be transfered over a short range, while small amounts of energy can get farther. Something like 20 to 25km for the basic T1 item could make sense.
Module: basically, all cosmos items
Problem: They suck with some exceptions. Take the Balefire Rocketlauncher for example. It is a rare item, you only get the blueprint once. It costs millions to build and is hardly better than the meta 2 Limos.
Fix: Like mentioned above, just play a bit and create different purposes/specialisation for those items. There's no general need that higher meta is always better, but at least it needs a role to fit in!
other notes:
fully supporting the idea of passive targeter beeing passive modules! I have one fitted on my mning barge to scan the fittings of ore thiefs flying around me in high sec. While having active targets like roids the passive targeter gets active on one of those.
|
Anig Browl
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.09.17 22:20:00 -
[102]
Module: Capacitor Control Circuit
Problem: no drawback, so many people fit 3 for 45-60% cap regen boost. Total 'something for nothing' compared to other rigs.
Solution: penalty to max cap
Module: tractor beams
Problem: Boring, no configuration or modifiers to range or speed
Solution: modifiable, maybe can act as half-assed webber
Module: auto targeting
Problem: doesn't seem to work
Solution: much faster back-targeting when fired on
Module: ECM burst
Problem: woefully ineffective
Solution: do not aggress ships which aren't targeting you (ie Concord, gate guns), maybe scriptable range or strength, much lower pg requirements, break own target locks too
Notes: ECM in general needs an overhaul. But making burst modules more effective would do a LOT to even up blob vs 1 warfare = fewer newbie instapops and subsequent whining.
Module: Defender missiles
Problem: useless. I laugh at them when I'm spamming missiles.
Fix: dedicated fast launcher and more HP damage
|
45thtiger 0109
|
Posted - 2008.09.19 14:02:00 -
[103]
Edited by: 45thtiger 0109 on 19/09/2008 14:04:37
All T2 Missiles
Suggested fix as what everyone has explained the T2 missiles and torps need alot of fixing.
All Seige launcher
Suggested fix:
Unerf the nerf that was placed on Seige Launcher quite awhile ago.
Like the range you can use a torp at for poss bashing a large pos.
|
Aarin Wrath
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.09.19 15:37:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Anig Browl
Module: tractor beams
Problem: Boring, no configuration or modifiers to range or speed
Solution: modifiable, maybe can act as half-assed webber
Gonna second that.
Module: Tractor Beams
Problem: No Medium or Large Tractor Beam. (better range? 40 km for medium ... 60km for large)
Solution: Introduce these modules. |
Rogerano
Minmatar
Einherjar Rising
Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.09.19 15:40:00 -
[105]
Edited by: Rogerano on 19/09/2008 15:43:01
Module: Damage Control
Problem: Is an active module. Active type is almost useless given cap use and function. You're never going to turn it off: it'll always be on, provided lag lets you turn it on, which is a problem in fleet fights. A DC has none of the benefits of other active modules such as overheat. There is no practical reason this module should be an active type.
Solution: Make DCs passive.
Notes: This module uses 1 cap every 30 seconds. It it practically impossible to be prevented from activating this module. The chances of this module being disabled by neut / nos are too low to be considered a factor. If a DC is disabled by cap drain, it is a simple and quick matter of spamming button until reactivation.
|
Destructor1792
Minmatar
Malicious Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.09.20 17:21:00 -
[106]
Edited by: Destructor1792 on 20/09/2008 17:21:12
Module: Hail Ammo (all sizes)
Problem: Absolutely useless within todays current game - tracking penalties too severe, optimal way too short , pitifull damage
Suggested Fix: Remove tracking penalty, increase optimal to at least 8500 & reduce fall off to a max of 12-15 (for large mods - adjust accordingly for M & S )
Other notes: As a whole, a majority of T2 ammo is gimped in some form or other - look at your logs.. that should give an indication as to what types need sorting out due to their lack of use.
----------------
Module: Projectiles / Hybrids / Lasers
Problem: Each designed to use on a certain race ship yet stops proper adjustments on them when attempting to balance them out.
Suggested Fix: Add a bonus to each ship reducing PG usage by 50-75% for the correct fitted guns. Increase PG usage on all gun modules so they're still able to fit on the correct ship but can only fit one or 2 if trying to cross fit.
(i.e. fitting 6 AC's onto a pest will work due to the PG reduction bonus - trying to fit the same guns onto an Apoc would max the grid out after attempting to fit either the 2 or 3rd one)
Other notes: This should allow the balancing of each race guns without making them overpowered when trying to fit to another race ship they don't truely belong to.
----------------
Module: Missiles (ammo charges) - All
Problem: As guns hit / miss / scratch , missiles don't - they hit.. every time.. without fail!
Suggested Fix: Introduce a variable which causes missiles to missfire (i.e. zero damage)or a mod that screws the guidance system of the launchers making the missiles fire / travel at a greatly reduced rate.
Other Notes: Missiles are currently the only charge where if your target is in range, they're pretty much guaranteed to hit and do damage - this is just seriously wrong when compared to other weapon systems!!!
______________________________________
Bringing The Fun Back
I Have No Fear, Fear is for the weak. |
Patrice Macmahon
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.09.22 02:22:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Marlenus
Edited by: Marlenus on 24/08/2008 18:57:45
Module: Defender Missiles
Problem: They are, being charitable, nearly worthless. They cannot be used in laggy situations because they stop firing, they cannot be used for fleet defense because they won't target enemy missiles generally, and they don't do enough damage on larger missile types.
Suggested Fix: Various. Most important is to NOT have them turn off the launchers when they temporarily run out of targets. Maybe give them a dedicated high-capacity launcher that auto-spams them. Increase hit points, and improve their targetting so they can shoot at all hostile missiles rather than just ones incoming to the defender-launching ship.
Other Notes: Make the new defender launcher fit in utility highs for fairness to non-missile races. If you also allow fleet defense capability, suddenly destroyers have a valuable fleet role. Win/profit!
To balance this, rather than being a traditional launcher (zero cap use) have it utilize cap similar to a passive defensive booster and have each module set up to effectively stop a percentage of the incomming missiles. I.E. it takes 3 launchers to effectively and completely neutralize 2 dedicated launchers, or 4 to 3 ratio.
The Intakis have an obligatin to defend the Federation, but not to assult others on its behalf. |
Mikal Drey
Minmatar
ORIGIN SYSTEMS
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.09.26 16:15:00 -
[108]
Module(s) : mobile bubbles
Problem : no control over anchoring point.
Solution : after jettison give them a controlable anchor point like a POS module
Reasoning : whenever you need to anchor a bubble you align your ship to the correct point then jettison, but when its jettisoned you loose (typically) about 500m from alignment. when using small bubbles it can completely missalign and ergo serve no purpose.
i'm NOT suggesting being 150km from a gate then moving the bubble ****loads of km as thats not a nice mechanic but just a few km would be nice. ty
 |
Jurgen Cartis
Caldari
Interstellar Corporation of Exploration
|
Posted - 2008.09.27 00:04:00 -
[109]
Module: Acolyte, Infiltrator, Praetor
Problem: Lack a compelling reason to use them over other drone types. All other types do more damage, Minmatar drones are faster and track better, Gallente drones do more damage (even against most rats that are weak to EM) and have the same armor HP and more stucture HP (Ogres in particular), and Caldari drones have more HP in the replenishable shield HP.
Suggested Fix: Boost the damage modifier to 1.35-1.4. All drones then have a nice damage/speed tradeoff.
Other Notes: They could use having some HP moved into armor as well, so they at least have the most armor HP, consistent with other Amarrian vessels.
--------------------
ICE Blueprint Sales
FIRST!! -Yipsilanti
Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth |
Vanessa Vasquez
Universal-Corp
|
Posted - 2008.09.29 09:13:00 -
[110]
Module: faction hybrids / T2 hybrids
Problem: useless after one has learned the advanced gun skill for that specific type
Suggested fix: change specific advanced gunnery skill to affect all guns of that type, not just the T2 counterparts
Other notes:
With the current settings, faction hybrids get pretty much useless once you skilled for T2 as they pull out more damage with the advanced skill up to lvl2 or 3. I find that unlogical, both, in RP and balancing.
RP: if you specialize in a group of items, how can everything except one variant of that group be excluded?
balancing: It's pretty obvious that everybody is using T2 guns once he meets the skill requirements. This is not because you can use advanced ammo, nor the fact they are way cheaper than best named/faction. The reason is the pure damage pullout. T2 guns are in fact fixed, you build your fitting around those.
This beeing said, it takes variety from the game in general. You wouldn't even consider fitting best named for fitting issues. With my suggestion, T2 would still pull more dps than best named while beeing a lot cheaper. And if one decides to spend 50m on a single gun for some minor advantage, he would get his reward vs. risk.
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |