EVE Search - Rig's reimagined.

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Rig's reimagined.

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dani Leone Gallente Freelancer Union Unaffiliated	Posted - 2009.05.11 11:22:00 - [1] Rigs... They are mostly lolspensive to put together, but can add a different dimension to some ships. Problem is that utility is utterly unbalanced with the cost. The ships that seem to benefit most from a good rigging exercise such as T1 frigs and cruisers are the very ones that its most disproportionate to rig out. I've always thought that the idea of jury rigging something would be done by a Scotty like master engineer, and would not be likely to produce an utterly predictable downside. So what I'd like to see is the rigs act like boosters in terms of penalties. In that having a pool of potential downsides as well as the chosen upside and the jury rigging skill affect the chance of getting a penalty with the spec skill affecting the severity of any applied penalties. When the rig is fitted the penalties are calculated and permantly applied. That way it can be a calculated gamble to fit trimarks on a Ceptor and so on. To fit with this might be to add a few new rig flavours: Limited(+3-5%)/Basic(+10%)/Improved(+15%)/Advanced(+20%) Obviously balanced to utility on a given boost. Have limited cost about 1-1.5mil to produce having minor or no penalties. Basic as per current but material costs rebalanced (so that Armor resist aren't 3-5 times as expensive to produce as shield as one example), Improved and Advanced on towards present TII sorts of costs. Of course thats adding a lot of rig types into the DB but I think, overall, that its not a bad thing, given the extra fun and income opprtunities for producers it would bring. -----------------------------
Jin Labarre	Posted - 2009.05.11 12:22:00 - [2] Yuck... So eventually, I would have to: 1. Buy ship 2. Buy rigs 3.1 Fit rig 1 to ship. Pray. Drawback acceptable? On to 4. Drawback horrible? On to 5. 3.2 Fit rig 2 to ship. Pray. Drawback acceptable? On to 4. Drawback horrible? On to 5. 3.3 Fit rig 3 to ship. Pray. Drawback acceptable? On to 4. Drawback horrible? On to 5. 4. Lucky me. 5. Rip it out again and waste more money. More rigs wasted means higher rig prices, due to increased demand. So even if the basic prices would be reduced, it would quickly even out for the most important rigs. All this would not add any fun to the game. It would just consume time, ISK and in turn add some useless frustration all over the place. Not an awesome idea, in my opinion.
Captain Zemo	Posted - 2009.05.11 13:02:00 - [3] Yeah I wouldn't like this either for the same reason. Tech II rigs do appear to be spectacularly overpriced though. Possibly change the system so rigs are dropped with a small probability, as loot. That would somewhat reduce their cost :) to zero.
Dani Leone Gallente Freelancer Union Unaffiliated	Posted - 2009.05.11 14:44:00 - [4] Originally by: Jin Labarre Yuck... So eventually, I would have to: 1. Buy ship 2. Buy rigs 3.1 Fit rig 1 to ship. Pray. Drawback acceptable? On to 4. Drawback horrible? On to 5. 3.2 Fit rig 2 to ship. Pray. Drawback acceptable? On to 4. Drawback horrible? On to 5. 3.3 Fit rig 3 to ship. Pray. Drawback acceptable? On to 4. Drawback horrible? On to 5. 4. Lucky me. 5. Rip it out again and waste more money. More rigs wasted means higher rig prices, due to increased demand. So even if the basic prices would be reduced, it would quickly even out for the most important rigs. All this would not add any fun to the game. It would just consume time, ISK and in turn add some useless frustration all over the place. Not an awesome idea, in my opinion. I dont see what the praying would be needed for... Using Trimarks as an example Limited 5% Armor Basic 15% Armor Improved 20% Armor Advanced 25% Armor Basic Trimark has a 15% chance each of the following draw backs and gives 15% more armor as it does now -10% Cap -10% Less Speed -10% Optimal +10% Cap Regen Your Jury Rigging Skill is at IV which reduces the chances of a drawback by 20% so each drawback has now a 12% chance of being applied. The actual total that will actually have 4 drawbacks is about .02% Sucks to be the one, but its long odds against it. Around 56% of fitted rigs will have no drawbacks of any kind a nice benefit to you training upto IV. This could of course be amended to give a fair chance of drawbacks to balance the rig benefits. Currently all rigs have a 100% risk of a single drawback and the new system would have the same skills mitigating the effects of a drawback. Also if as I proposed, the Limited rigs have no drawbacks, then you could fit 3x 5% Limited Trimarks and have 0% chance of a drawback. So you waste no more money unless you want 15%/20%/25% more armor or cap or whatever. -----------------------------
AtheistOfDoom Amarr The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction	Posted - 2009.05.12 01:43:00 - [5] Rigs are fine. And then, he killed the dog...
Arushia Nova Labs New Eden Research	Posted - 2009.05.12 04:27:00 - [6] EvE does not need additional chance-based mechanics. New Eden Research, where your research gets done!
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2009.05.12 07:51:00 - [7] Edited by: Fullmetal Jackass on 12/05/2009 07:53:01 Originally by: Dani Leone Rigs... They are mostly lolspensive to put together, but can add a different dimension to some ships. Problem is that utility is utterly unbalanced with the cost. The ships that seem to benefit most from a good rigging exercise such as T1 frigs and cruisers are the very ones that its most disproportionate to rig out. I've always thought that the idea of jury rigging something would be done by a Scotty like master engineer... Ya had me up untill right about there. I completely agree that the ships that could benifit the most are the least likely to see a rig used on them. I can also, sorta, jump on the "random effect" band wagon, but not quite the way you laid it out. Mostly though I think rigs need to be class and tech specific. EG there should be a specific version of each current rig for t1 frigates and destroyers. Another specific version for T2 frigates and destroyers. Another sepcific version for T1 cruisers and BC's. ect ect ect... I really liked the orginal idea of "pimp your ride". It turned into "corporate backed, professional race teams only" though. It's way too costly to rig most ships. But if you lower the cost of the "one size fits all" rigs, the high end ships still dominate. The only change would be rigging would be a "must have" for all ships.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2009.05.12 09:04:00 - [8] CCP has floated 2 ideas they're working on for rigs. One of them was planned for apocrypha then delayed due to time issues. Idea 1: scale appropriate rigs. I.e. rigs for frigs take less parts to build, thus become cheaper and viable to fit. Idea 2: Reconditioning, x amount of broken salvage can be reconditioned into y amount of unbroken salvage. This would increase the supply of building materials needed for T2 rigs, thus lowering their prices. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Bibbleibble	Posted - 2009.05.12 09:40:00 - [9] TBH I would prefer that they just made sized rigs, rather than giving unpredictable side effects. ________________________________________________ Check out my ideas! New Destroyers
Allen Ramses Caldari Typo Corp	Posted - 2009.05.12 10:49:00 - [10] If it was up to me, rigs would be removed from the game. But that is another matter. I support the idea behind sized rigs, but only after every rig is re-written from scratch. Some of the rig values are just absurd. Half are worse than their T1 counterpart, and others are better than their T2 counterpart. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006.
TedJanitor	Posted - 2009.05.12 11:05:00 - [11] Sized based rigs could work, but I think a chance based mechanic would be an irritating aspect to the game - I'm sad to say that eve is heavily calculatory in it's gameplay (Combat anyway), and a uncertain factor would be frustrating. Maybe a differently sized rig for each class could work, possibly with greater skill requirements dependant on the class
Fullmetal Jackass	Posted - 2009.05.19 03:01:00 - [12] Size approprate rigs is probably the best bet. I'd still like to request rigs that only fit on t1 ships though. Even if they were slightly less effective, as long as they were cheaper.
Clansworth Good Rock Materials	Posted - 2009.05.19 07:18:00 - [13] I agree that sized rigs are pretty much all that is really needed to widen their use. I mean, a rig is a modification of the bas ship attributes, which, imho, shouldn't be necessary on all craft. It's a special use item.. currently though, the only thing limiting this is the fact that they are too expensive for the smaller ships (and, really, too cheap for the capitals). As for the tech 1 only stuff, i think the lower slots/calibration on tech 2 already provides enough restriction in this regard. Intel Boost

Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.