Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zero Blue
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 22:31:00 -
[1]
Ok so we have cargo hold expanders so why not drone bay expanders? Not to put on a ship to add a drone bay but to increase the existing one and raise the control bandwidth.
So thatÆs most of you put off û so a mod only for ships that have a drone bay already.
Fitted to low slot just like a cargo expander but with power grid and CPU requirements, I figure something like this:
Basic Dronebay expander 1mw and 20tf Dronebay expander 5mw and 25tf T2 Dronebay expander 10mw and 30tf
Each expander would give extra m3 and bandwith
Basic Dronebay expander 5m3 and 5Mbit/sec Dronebay expander 10m3 and 10Mbit/sec T2 Dronebay expander 25m3 and 25Mbit/sec
All expanders would cause the same problems as cargo expanders -10% to structure HP and -20% to Velocity
And just to annoy people thinking about fitting a low rail full of T2 only one expander allowed on a ship.
Now if you are not to bored skill requirements :
Basic Dronebay expander û Drones 1, Scout Drone 1, Hull Upgrades 1, Electronics 1, Energy Grid Upgrades 1. Dronebay expander û Drones 3, Scout Drone 2, Hull Upgrades 2, Electronics 2, Energy Grid Upgrades 2. T2 Dronebay expander û Drones 4, Scout Drone 4, Hull Upgrades 3, Electronics 4, Energy Grid Upgrades 2.
Now this is where you say you canÆt see the point û but if you are flying say an Absolution you can only carry 5 light drones û add a T2 expander and suddenly you are using 5 Medium drones or carrying 10 light drones to replace losses in use both mission runners and pvpÆer get a boost.
Also of course if EVE was a real universe (yes I know it really is) surely if cargo expanders were developed so would drone bay expanders.
Ok so what do we think total idiot or possible good idea ?
|
Ausser
Cybertech Industrials Agency
|
Posted - 2009.06.30 23:33:00 -
[2]
Nice indirect boost to some shield tanked ships. Caldari would be happy. I can see lots of drone/neut drakes/scorps out there.
I've didnt looked on balancing ships, but i bet it ends up with lots of issues.
Also the fitting requirements are verry low (cpu).
|
mchief117
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 00:24:00 -
[3]
i doubt that they would be higher as you would simply be adding a few control ports in the cargo hold for more drones , i like the idea
|
Nub Sauce
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 01:10:00 -
[4]
Sounds good to me. Makes sense that such a thing would have been invented by now.
|
dadar
Therapy. KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 01:17:00 -
[5]
I like the idea but from a balance point of view it will never work as some ships would be to over powered if they could use larger drones.
|
Jin Nib
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 01:24:00 -
[6]
Originally by: dadar I like the idea but from a balance point of view it will never work as some ships would be to over powered if they could use larger drones.
Perhaps loading them in a different slot then low? I think the balence problem wouldnt be that hard to address though.
-Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Breanta Nryrun
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 02:05:00 -
[7]
I believe that there would be a great balance issue with the Gallente Drone boats. They are strong now and adding to their drone power. . .well you can imagine WTFPWN.
If it was not for the balance issue, I would say good idea
|
Marcus Gideon
Gallente The NightClub
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 02:09:00 -
[8]
Looking at the Drone Control Unit, it has a heck of a PG/CPU draw. So maybe that's why a "simple expander" isn't available. |
thoraxius demioses
Gallente Privateers Privateer Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 02:45:00 -
[9]
back to a 5 hvy drone eos would put a smile on my face
|
ArcticPrism
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 02:58:00 -
[10]
Gallente would benefit significantly more than other races as most of their ships (if not all) can field at least one drone. Would be VERY POWERFUL especially when coupled with ships that have drone bonuses: Vexor, Arbitrator, Myrmidon etc.
Also: The fitting requirements and drawbacks are too small.
|
|
Amasai
Starfire Oasis Thalion Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 03:00:00 -
[11]
the primary balance issue I see is that you still have full full high slot weapon fittings, thus raising your over all dps too much
WaSaBi |
Verlokiraptor
All Around Research Inc Onslaught.
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 03:05:00 -
[12]
Imagine every frigate, hauler, mining ship and so on ever, now imagine that every single goddamn one has 5 light drones.
Yeah no.
At the very least it would have to be balanced for ship class with powergrid. Really, for a ship with no dronebay, 25m3 is +100dps. And you can fit this crap on anything
I'd suggest something like a small = 100mm plate fitting, medium = 400mm plate fitting and large = 1600mm plate fitting. It means you can stuff one onto a smaller ship class if you really want to and it also has a clear comparison: they slow your ship down similarly but the drone one swaps EHP for utility or damage.
I think a high slot module could be a bad idea unless it had a restrictive fitting cost or they'd be all over hacs everywhere, but if it they're still restricted to medium expanders via PG it wouldn't be too bad.
|
Marcus Gideon
Gallente The NightClub
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 03:11:00 -
[13]
I don't think a drone bay would really slow you down.
If anything, it'd be sacrificing cargo space instead.
But I do think it would also have some pretty stout PG/CPU requirements, especially when you talk about giving ships completely without inherent drones the wiring and such.
Turning a Blackbird or Maller into a Vexor should not be a pretty sight.
HEY... make these Rigs instead of just Lows. Reduce CPU and PG, along with Cargo Capacity... --- Players aren't interested in Variety, they only want THE BEST |
Grarr Dexx
Amarr Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 04:24:00 -
[14]
Extra drone bay, yes; extra bandwidth, no. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Jin Nib
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 04:45:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Grarr Dexx Extra drone bay, yes; extra bandwidth, no.
That would go a far way to balencing it. What about an additional module to add band width?
Either way I think lows are the wrong slots for these, middle would make most sense. While you gain DPS you loose a lot of versatility if you're putting two modules in there. Esspecailly if they were given higher CPU reqs, which I see no reason for them not to have. Its not just more space, its more landing area storage fuel blah blah blah and of course more nodes of technofluff-**** inorder to interface with the things.
-Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 04:47:00 -
[16]
A low would be a boost to shieldtankers, a middle would be an unneeded boost to Gallente drone boats. There is no way to justify and balance a module that can add extra firepower to a ship in such a rough manner. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
Jin Nib
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 05:10:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Jin Nib on 01/07/2009 05:11:05 Hmm good point. If how ever the module was split between a bandwidth booster and a drone space booster you could have the bandwidth in a mid slot and the space increase in a low slot. Minmatar I think might benifit well from something like that.
Personaly I'd like the races to be more straiated towards their key racial strengths then they are right now, it would make the game more interesting IMO. Thus if the Gallente boats were improved by this, it would'nt bother me so much as long as they balanced the ships across the line.
Alot of work for rather small payoff it seems, especailly when I wish they'd finish balenceing half the stuff in the game.
-Jin Nib Trading on behalf of Opera Noir since: 2009.03.02 03:53:00
|
Jade Mitch
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 05:59:00 -
[18]
I like Jin Bin's suggestion. Most ships have drone bays so it wouldn't just benefit Gallente ships. Amarr ships tend to have the most low slots so a drone bay expander module would be easier for them to fit. Caldari ships tend to have the most mid slots so a drone bandwidth module would be easier for them to fit. Gallente and Minmatar ships tend to be more evenly split between the mids and lows so it would be more difficult for them to make room for either type of module and that's where it all balances out.
|
Sigras
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 06:51:00 -
[19]
i like the low slot to expand the drone bay but for bandwidth it should really be a high slot module . . . drones are a weapon . . . just look at the drone control unit
|
Grarr Dexx
Amarr Corp 1 Allstars
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 06:52:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Grarr Dexx on 01/07/2009 06:52:41 Fit two on a vexor and voila, you have a T1 Ishtar. It's not balanced.
EDIT: Same goes for the Myrmidon. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist |
|
soldieroffortune 258
Gallente Trinity Council Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 07:15:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Jin Nib
Originally by: dadar I like the idea but from a balance point of view it will never work as some ships would be to over powered if they could use larger drones.
Perhaps loading them in a different slot then low? I think the balence problem wouldnt be that hard to address though.
im not so sure, its kinda late in my corner of the world, but right now, im imagining a Myrmidon fitted with a few of these ddrone bay expanders, sure with this idea it might now be able to field a full flight of sentries/t2 heavies, but you also have to take into account that for the myrmidon in this example, youd be sacrificing alot of tank, what are you going to take away to fit say . . . . . .2 drone bay expanders? one of the reppers and a hardener? ok, you can still rep, but now have lower resists, take away two hardeners, keep both reppers? again, lower resists, have to hope those reppers work pretty damn well, remove both reppers, make it a gank ship? it just becomes a more expensive brutix, a glass cannon, ****load of damage, not tanking very much though
someoen said something about seeing alot of neut ravens/drakes and the like, also, dont forget, passive fits use their low slots so shield tankers arent going to have very good passive fits, they going to have to switch to active fits, but now that itself has a weakness doesnt it? its vulnerable to neuts, and assuming its a 'neut drake' like you said, neuting drake with an active tank? i dont think so, dont caldari ships have smaller capacitor capacities anywhoo?
sounds like a good idea in my opinion, like someone has said already, no reason this shoulndt have been implemented already, CCP, chop chop Please re-size your signature to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes.Applebabe
|
soldieroffortune 258
Gallente Trinity Council Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 07:18:00 -
[22]
Edited by: soldieroffortune 258 on 01/07/2009 07:19:10
Originally by: Grarr Dexx Edited by: Grarr Dexx on 01/07/2009 06:52:41 Fit two on a vexor and voila, you have a T1 Ishtar. It's not balanced.
EDIT: Same goes for the Myrmidon.
see my first post, and see your own, i think it is balanced, you fit 2 of these on a vexor, what room do you have now for any kind of tank (for what little room a vexor has anyway)? dcu and a 1600mm plate? crap resists, you drop like a rock, a drone carrying glass cannon, sure, like i said, it can field a full flight of t2 heavies, but what use are they when you only gonna be shooting those heavies at your enemy for 10 seconds and you dead? Please re-size your signature to a maximum of 400 x 120 with the file size not exceeding 24000 bytes.Applebabe
|
Salpad
Caldari Carebears with Attitude
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 08:20:00 -
[23]
Yes to drone bay expansion. Being able to carry more spare drones is good.
No to drone bandwidth-increasing modules. Just no.
-- Salpad |
Kail Storm
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 09:00:00 -
[24]
In my original post I suggested this in Modules and got my ass chewed hard. What you do is make it a rig so its even and you make it so that the setback wouldnt fit in a frigate, or a frig could only hold 5m3 5 band.
Cruiser rig would be 10m3 10 mbit and have 2 possibles BC 15m3/mbitx2 BS 25m3/mbit x2
But you would say all t2 ships limited to 1.
Now I loved the idea because cald t1 cruisers could actually be competetive up close because we could now launch webbing/jamming drones at 30 km with our missles instead of our 10m3 and 15/m3 pathetic dronebays now but it would hurt our tank a little by taking up our rig slots.
|
Ned Black
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 10:14:00 -
[25]
I love drones, but personally I think there are far to many drones out there as is. I would not want even more drones. |
Zero Blue
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 10:55:00 -
[26]
Hmm some good points guys
the reason I said low slot is that no matter what ship you will lose something - tank/cap charge/damage mod so you have to give up something to gain the extra drone space and bandwidth.
as for fitting 2 to a ship I already said only on ships with drone bays already and only 1 to a ship.
as for fitting requirements anyone got any ideas ? mine were roughtly based on replacing a damage mod.
|
Miilla
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 10:59:00 -
[27]
I want to use more than 5 drones.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 11:18:00 -
[28]
since drones arent affected by any ewar once engaged a target, this would make drones a way overpowered I think.
|
Erika Bronz
Gallente The Wyld Hunt Saints Amongst Sinners
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 11:41:00 -
[29]
I support both a drone damage modifier, extra bandwidth module and drone bay extender, but bandwidth/damage mod and drone bay can not be on same module. Bandwidth or drone damage modifier need to be in highslot. This will simply move the gank and utility over to drones instead of overpowering some ships. Drone bay modifiers, I agree, need to be in lowslots.
|
Erika Bronz
Gallente The Wyld Hunt Saints Amongst Sinners
|
Posted - 2009.07.01 11:42:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Robert Caldera since drones arent affected by any ewar once engaged a target, this would make drones a way overpowered I think.
Drones can be targeted for e-war. You can even jam drones.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |