EVE Search - How the new "Multi-Sized Rigs system" may or may not ruin pvp

All Channels

Ships and Modules

How the new "Multi-Sized Rigs system" may or may not ruin pvp

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:25:00 - [1] I would just like to open the floor to people who feel that their are serious down sides to making rigs more affordable... Does it not bother anyone and im speaking to thoughs who enjoy solo pvp mostly. That it will in many cases make destroying ships of frigate af and bc class very difficult increasing the time it would take to destroy them. Enabling a pilot to call for support or in most cases just tank u forever unless neuts where applied but still the argument is the same the engagment would last longer. Not only that it would seem that with added peral involved in such under taking then the only option pilots would be forced to have is flying in small gangs or large fleets to increase the chances of sucess in a short time to gtfo... What i enjoyed about eve pvp that it was fun and fast, you have to react very fast to circumstances and environments that change very rapidly in engagements that lasted within a short time frame. "To me it was like high speed chess" Also pvp in it self is expensive thoughs who fly as much as i do can testify to this. Introducing small rigs increases the cost of pvp by waht seems like to me 30 - 45 %. Now what fool woudnt adapted to new situations, and also buy small rigs to compete with lets say another t1 rifter pilot who in most likely is'nt so *****ed or lacks some sort of want for preservation like most " care bears/mission bears" taht they wudnt tank the fok out of that rifter. many wud make the same assumption, that not rigging your t1 ship "would be fail". I would just like other people's opinion. Obviously its not just about rigs the module it self but, how it affects pvp and how pvp in general seems to be getting nerfed with these "Changes".
Durzel The Xenodus Initiative.	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:26:00 - [2] Could you at least wait until they're actually seeded on the market and people actually start using them before doom mongering?
Ecky X	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:29:00 - [3] 45% more shield on a Rifter is not game-breaking.
4THELULZ	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:31:00 - [4] Originally by: Proxyyyy I would just like to open the floor to people who feel that there are serious down sides to making rigs more affordable... Does it not bother anyone and I'm speaking to those who enjoy solo pvp mostly. That it will in many cases make destroying ships of frigate af and bc class very difficult increasing the time it would take to destroy them. Enabling a pilot to call for support or in most cases just tank u forever unless neuts where applied but still the argument is the same the engagment would last longer. Not only that it would seem that with added peril involved in such under taking then the only option pilots would be forced to have is flying in small gangs or large fleets to increase the chances of sucess in a short time to gtfo... What I enjoyed about eve pvp that it was fun and fast, you have to react very fast to circumstances and environments that change very rapidly in engagements that lasted within a short time frame. "To me it was like high speed chess" Also pvp in itself is expensive those who fly as much as I do can testify to this. Introducing small rigs increases the cost of pvp by what seems like to me 30 - 45 %. Now what fool woudnt adapted to new situations, and also buy small rigs to compete with lets say another t1 rifter pilot who in most likely isn't so ****ed or lacks some sort of want for preservation like most " care bears/mission bears" that** they wudnt tank the fok out of that rifter. many would* make the same assumption, that not rigging your t1 ship "would be fail". I would just like other people's opinion. Obviously its not just about rigs the module itself but, how it affects pvp and how pvp in general seems to be getting nerfed with these "Changes". Right, that's most of that fixed, now would someone mind explaining in English what the hell this guy is whining about?
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:40:00 - [5] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/08/2009 18:42:10 Originally by: Proxyyyy I would just like to open the floor to people who feel that their are serious down sides to making rigs more affordable... Does it not bother anyone and im speaking to thoughs who enjoy solo pvp mostly. That it will in many cases make destroying ships of frigate af and bc class very difficult increasing the time it would take to destroy them. Enabling a pilot to call for support or in most cases just tank u forever unless neuts where applied but still the argument is the same the engagment would last longer. I do solo PVP a lot of the time, all my BCs were always rigged (cheaply), and I do not find it the least bit gamebreaking. You just need to fit for DPS - like you always did if you wanted to do the quick gank. The only thing which is really changed is now T1 cruisers are going to be rigged by default and therefore more potent; but they're still going to die preety quickly.
Removal Tool Two Minutes Hate	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:42:00 - [6] If the small rigs are cheap enough, Destroyers will rival Assault Ships, Ishkur will still be the best AF, and the good T1 cruisers will be even better (Rupter!) And I guess T2 cruiser hulls will be cheaper to fit. Same for BC/CS if they use Med sized rigs as I expect. Hopefully more noobs will feel capable of pvp.
Hidden Snake Caldari More-Cowbell	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:44:00 - [7] Well what is ccp doing wrong that they are killing small gang solo warfare by permanent increase of tank of the ships and nerfing gank. This is strategy to help new players, but it kills the best part of pvp. Lets see what happens with this ¦rig my rifter¦ frenzy now.
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:45:00 - [8] Edited by: Proxyyyy on 20/08/2009 18:48:28 Originally by: Ecky X 45% more shield on a Rifter is not game-breaking. Well it would be nice to just wave it off as just as simple as that, im not sure you understand what the new application of these riggs will be. Since the new rigging system scales (3 cap control circuit1-2) will be a norm on rifters possibly most will relize that a duel repping setup will be more viable which would mean t1 frigates preforming like af's... Small Armor Repairer II Small Armor Repairer II dc II 1MN Afterburner II Warp Scrambler Small Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 200 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Nos Cap control circuit I Cap control circuit I Cap control circuit I Mind you i didnt add the t1 cruiser class or bs cause they wont realy be affected by this the rupturewill still own its jsut that it may be duel repped, in facted i think this might bring in a new age of active tanking over buffer tanking...
Psiri	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:46:00 - [9] downsides 1) an undeserved indirect nerf to BS 2) nerf to cheapfits, as rigs now will be commonly used by everyone upsides 1) More fun ship fits made viable (IMO) 2) Benefitting players who already were always rigging their ships anyway (errr.. wouldn't really call this an upside) IMO it's a good change but PvP desperately needs to be more lucrative than it currently is. Increase module drop rate from wrecks, bring more people down to lowsec, reduce the cost of ships.. anything.
Manu Hermanus FaDoyToy	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:48:00 - [10] Originally by: 4THELULZ Right, that's most of that fixed, now would someone mind explaining in English what the hell this guy is whining about? bait rifters will ruin solo/small gang pvp! that is what I got from it at least
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:49:00 - [11] IMO it makes HACs and CS even more useless, now that BCs can be triple rigged without the huge price spike. I'd like to see HACs and the field CS get a boost.
Dawts Interstellar Brotherhood of Gravediggers Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:50:00 - [12] Because customization is bad?
Qi Teuf Epiphyte Mining and Exploration Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:51:00 - [13] I use rigs on any ship I fly as long as I have the Isk at the time to purchase them. This doesn't change my game play at all, except for making it cheaper for me to replace a ship. I know there are others out there that have the same mindset that I do; putting rigs on a ship, when the ship is less expensive than the rigs, is still a good idea. It really doesn't change much in my eyes.
Psiri	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:55:00 - [14] Originally by: Proxyyyy Since the new rigging system scales (3 cap control circuit1-2) will be a norm on rifters possibly most will relize that a duel repping setup will be more viable which would mean t1 frigates preforming like af's... AF's generally don't field rigs and they will be now, it's just not frigs benefitting from this. To be fair I suspect that T1 frigs won't benefit as much from this in comparison to AF's and BC/Cruisers, T1 frigs are s'posed to be cheap and rigs don't play into their forte. I expect to see alot of BC/AF's in space after this change.
Manu Hermanus FaDoyToy	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:57:00 - [15] Originally by: Proxyyyy Edited by: Proxyyyy on 20/08/2009 18:48:28 Originally by: Ecky X 45% more shield on a Rifter is not game-breaking. Well it would be nice to just wave it off as just as simple as that, im not sure you understand what the new application of these riggs will be. Since the new rigging system scales (3 cap control circuit1-2) will be a norm on rifters possibly most will relize that a duel repping setup will be more viable which would mean t1 frigates preforming like af's... Small Armor Repairer II Small Armor Repairer II dc II 1MN Afterburner II Warp Scrambler Small Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 200 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Nos Cap control circuit I Cap control circuit I Cap control circuit I Mind you i didnt add the t1 cruiser class or bs cause they wont realy be affected by this the rupturewill still own its jsut that it may be duel repped, in facted i think this might bring in a new age of active tanking over buffer tanking... OH NOES! it tanks 62 dps, whatever will I do
Xetal Maelstrom	Posted - 2009.08.20 18:58:00 - [16] A lot of BC and smaller T1 hulls don't get rigged before the patch. After the patch they will. This makes them a bit stronger and a bit more expensive. Almost all T2 hulls got rigged before the patch. After the patch they still will. This makes them the same strength, but cheaper. Net change: T1 ships and T2 ships (in comparison to each other) became more similar: Their prices got a little bit closer, and their ability got a little bit closer. Do I think this is going to have a huge effect? Not really. T2 ships will still be considerably stronger for those who can afford it. You'll probably see more T1 ships floating around in space... but in reality I don't think it'll have a huge change on PvP.
Xian Cthulhu	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:02:00 - [17] I think good idea...yet to see if it is good idea to make them the same bonus/draw back as large size though.
ISK Launderer	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:03:00 - [18] CONFIRMED, THIS WILL RUIN ALL PVP. THIS PATCH NEEDS TO BE ROLLED BACK NOW OR THE CAREBEARS HAVE WON EVE.
demonfurbie Minmatar Covert-Nexus	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:04:00 - [19] Originally by: AstroPhobic IMO it makes HACs and CS even more useless, now that BCs can be triple rigged without the huge price spike. I'd like to see HACs and the field CS get a boost. i agree also it seams like a small boost to faction frigs imo and assault ships .... i cant wait to nanobot my ishkur
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:04:00 - [20] This thread may be really stupid.
Zal Dakkar	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:05:00 - [21] Edited by: Zal Dakkar on 20/08/2009 19:07:39 Originally by: Qi Teuf I know there are others out there that have the same mindset that I do; putting rigs on a ship, when the ship is less expensive than the rigs, is still a good idea. You are the minority, your phrasing essentially admitted that fact. I know the majority of my corp (and other corps I have contact with) will be moving from rarely rigging frigates and cruisers to commonly rigging them. Edit: To add something to the dicussion... I like the change. Now take out insurance.
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:06:00 - [22] null null Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/08/2009 18:42:10 Originally by: Proxyyyy I would just like to open the floor to people who feel that their are serious down sides to making rigs more affordable... Does it not bother anyone and im speaking to thoughs who enjoy solo pvp mostly. That it will in many cases make destroying ships of frigate af and bc class very difficult increasing the time it would take to destroy them. Enabling a pilot to call for support or in most cases just tank u forever unless neuts where applied but still the argument is the same the engagment would last longer. I do solo PVP a lot of the time, all my BCs were always rigged (cheaply), and I do not find it the least bit gamebreaking. You just need to fit for DPS - like you always did if you wanted to do the quick gank. The only thing which is really changed is now T1 cruisers are going to be rigged by default and therefore more potent; but they're still going to die preety quickly. Maybe i didnt make the topic more defined ("im sorry") this realy only affects thoughs in low and null sec. Mind you Bydi is a feared group in low sec "(much respect)" and for good reason u guys are known gankers, i see you guys around alot in your rr'ing bs gangs and sometimes a small hac gangs. A small minority of you corp solo's, and most are well off isk wise, this is about making pvp more affordable for new players and thoughs who would like to learn about solo pvp. As for the privateers "(respect)" but most of you are not affected by this as i do see you guys in syndicate once in awhile and traveling threw low sec. i dont think this affects you cause u guys pretty much still do hi/sec war dec's. This realy only applies to solo pvp in low and maybe null sec...
steveid Federal Defence Union	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:08:00 - [23] the only problem I see is that BC should have BS sized rigs. If that is the case already then all good imo.
Samaritan Azuma Jericho Industries	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:09:00 - [24] awwww poor thing, now poor people will be able to be more able to compete. STFU this is closer to balance than game breaking
Roland Deschaines Minmatar Esquires Of Questionable Intention	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:10:00 - [25] 1. The OP flies solo a lot. 2. It costs him a lot. 3. He puts CCC on a combat Rifter. Make your conclusions, gentlemen.
slightly sillydude	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:12:00 - [26] Originally by: AstroPhobic IMO it makes HACs and CS even more useless, now that BCs can be triple rigged without the huge price spike. I'd like to see HACs and the field CS get a boost. Agreed. Though I think Hacs just need their prices slashed like a wrist, not necessarily a performance boost. Command ships need a performance boost.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:15:00 - [27] Edited by: Seriously Bored on 20/08/2009 19:18:26 When they were first rolling this idea around, I was expecting tiered rigs similar to what we see with implants. For instance, you'd have a RoF rig giving 5%, 7%, 10% bonuses, and can fit anything on anything. But the way it is, it's sort of power creep across the board. Your target can afford rigs now, but you can get 'em for less now too. And I'm okay with that. The way I see it, this is only an issue to the ultra-rich, who were rigging everything in sight and just want to keep their power dispairity. Nerf the aristocracy! Buff the bourgeoisie! The proletariat is still broke and fine, imo.
Qi Teuf Epiphyte Mining and Exploration Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:17:00 - [28] Originally by: Zal Dakkar Edited by: Zal Dakkar on 20/08/2009 19:07:39 Originally by: Qi Teuf I know there are others out there that have the same mindset that I do; putting rigs on a ship, when the ship is less expensive than the rigs, is still a good idea. You are the minority, your phrasing essentially admitted that fact. I know the majority of my corp (and other corps I have contact with) will be moving from rarely rigging frigates and cruisers to commonly rigging them. Edit: To add something to the dicussion... I like the change. Now take out insurance. This is going to even the playing field. This makes it easier for players with less Isk to fight competively with players who were already spending full price on rigs. I understand that I was the exception not the rule when it came to rigging my AF's/BC's/Cruisers. To the OP: I don't expect fights to take anymore time. There are a lot of options in rigging that has nothing to do with tanking. How about ambit rigs for minnie ships, or CCC's for being more cap stable. If anything I would think that long time PvPers would be more upset about this (if the current CCP financial quarterly is correct), due to their access to more Isk, and therefor being able to rig frigs pre patch.
techzer0 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:19:00 - [29] Originally by: Proxyyyy Edited by: Proxyyyy on 20/08/2009 18:48:28 Originally by: Ecky X 45% more shield on a Rifter is not game-breaking. Well it would be nice to just wave it off as just as simple as that, im not sure you understand what the new application of these riggs will be. Since the new rigging system scales (3 cap control circuit1-2) will be a norm on rifters possibly most will relize that a duel repping setup will be more viable which would mean t1 frigates preforming like af's... Small Armor Repairer II Small Armor Repairer II dc II 1MN Afterburner II Warp Scrambler Small Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 200 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S 150mm Light AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S Nos Cap control circuit I Cap control circuit I Cap control circuit I Mind you i didnt add the t1 cruiser class or bs cause they wont realy be affected by this the rupturewill still own its jsut that it may be duel repped, in facted i think this might bring in a new age of active tanking over buffer tanking... I already use that rifter setup without the CCCs, it would be better off with Armor rigs or Projectile/Propulsion rigs... why would you put CCCs on a cap boosted pvp ship?
techzer0 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:23:00 - [30] This is just gonna make it cheaper for me to rig the rest of my ships... all of my AFs, cruisers, HACs, recons, ceptors, cov-ops, ...and on and on (you get the idea) are already rigged, so it's not changing anything for me. Maybe I'll just trimark and extender rig everything and come wardec you to get another whine topic posted
Suitonia Gallente Genos Occidere	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:38:00 - [31] Originally by: Cpt Branko Edited by: Cpt Branko on 20/08/2009 18:42:10 Originally by: Proxyyyy I would just like to open the floor to people who feel that their are serious down sides to making rigs more affordable... Does it not bother anyone and im speaking to thoughs who enjoy solo pvp mostly. That it will in many cases make destroying ships of frigate af and bc class very difficult increasing the time it would take to destroy them. Enabling a pilot to call for support or in most cases just tank u forever unless neuts where applied but still the argument is the same the engagment would last longer. I do solo PVP a lot of the time, all my BCs were always rigged (cheaply), and I do not find it the least bit gamebreaking. You just need to fit for DPS - like you always did if you wanted to do the quick gank. The only thing which is really changed is now T1 cruisers are going to be rigged by default and therefore more potent; but they're still going to die preety quickly. This. Oh and welcome back Branko, decided to resub recently? --- Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Cearain	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:40:00 - [32] Let me just admit that I am not a big fan of blitz chess. But I think the op does have some logic for his position but is perhaps conflating two different issues: 1)Is the game mechanic too lopsided toward tanking instead of ganking? and 2) should rigs be more affordable for small ships? These are really two different questions and should be viewed as different questions. There are rigs to increase gank and rigs to increase tank. He is making an assumption that the rigs that increase tank are much better than the rigs that increase gank. This may be true. If we assume this is true then this change will lead to more tank. Now I don't think this is a problem, but if it is, it would seem that the way to correct the problem would be to rebalance the rig gank/tank ratio directly. But more importantly, if you think combat should be finished faster then I think there are many other things that can be done. Looking at rigs and saying no one should be able to afford them for most of their ships is IMO misguided. The issue really does not even directly deal with rigs. Why not just make gank mods/rigs/ship bonuses stronger or tank mods/rigs/ship bonuses weaker? Again if that is what you are after there are more direct routes than the somewhat convoluted method of simply making all rigs too expensive to buy for most ships. As for me I canÆt wait for the new rigs. I think its going to be great.
Almori	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:47:00 - [33] Many say it. I will say it too. ADAPT OR DIE. Thank you for your attention.
Mason Briggs	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:48:00 - [34] I can't believe this... I really can't... I've just finished waiting for a month to do material research on a Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Bluprint... The point of this was to try out exploration and maybe make a few isk also... I just bought a Buzzard that i can't drive yet (will be able to in 6 days), so i couldn't rig it while waiting... And here they come and mess it all up... They take my blueprint and change it to the large version of the rig and crush my dreams Cause not only can't I fit it on my ship now but essentially the blueprint is now useless cause who in their right mind would rig a large vessel for exploration. They should have given us a choice or something... Is anyone as mad as me on this one? Is anyone I can complain to make my blueprint for frigates???
Lexa Hellfury Incura	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:52:00 - [35] Originally by: Mason Briggs Edited by: Mason Briggs on 20/08/2009 19:50:08 I can't believe this... I really can't... I've just finished waiting for a month to do material research on a Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Bluprint... The point of this was to try out exploration and maybe make a few isk also... I just bought a Buzzard that i can't drive yet (will be able to in 6 days), so i couldn't rig it while waiting... And here they come and mess it all up... They take my blueprint and change it to the large version of the rig and crush my dreams ... I just realize I might not be in the right board to complain!!! Cause not only can't I fit it on my ship now but essentially the blueprint is now useless cause who in their right mind would rig a large vessel for exploration. They should have given us a choice or something... Is anyone as mad as me on this one? Is anyone I can complain to make my blueprint for frigates??? Originally by: RedSplat The Forum moderation Software known as Mitnal became self aware. CCP had no choice but to shut it down.
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:56:00 - [36] Originally by: Cearain Let me just admit that I am not a big fan of blitz chess. But I think the op does have some logic for his position but is perhaps conflating two different issues: 1)Is the game mechanic too lopsided toward tanking instead of ganking? and 2) should rigs be more affordable for small ships? These are really two different questions and should be viewed as different questions. There are rigs to increase gank and rigs to increase tank. He is making an assumption that the rigs that increase tank are much better than the rigs that increase gank. This may be true. If we assume this is true then this change will lead to more tank. Now I don't think this is a problem, but if it is, it would seem that the way to correct the problem would be to rebalance the rig gank/tank ratio directly. But more importantly, if you think combat should be finished faster then I think there are many other things that can be done. Looking at rigs and saying no one should be able to afford them for most of their ships is IMO misguided. The issue really does not even directly deal with rigs. Why not just make gank mods/rigs/ship bonuses stronger or tank mods/rigs/ship bonuses weaker? Again if that is what you are after there are more direct routes than the somewhat convoluted method of simply making all rigs too expensive to buy for most ships. As for me I canÆt wait for the new rigs. I think its going to be great. Agreed... But i my main arguments are increased cost of pvp, making rigs more afforable forces thoughs who woudnt think of rigging a t1 ship bc and lower are now forced to, and if anyone of you pvp alot you know this increase would mean less time pvp and more time making isk, than pvp'ing as for rigs everyone knows damage rigs are not even close to as usefull as thoughs that increase tank I.E. speed/active/passive Extesion rigs for slipneir and vagabonds make sense of course... And yes 1 of my arguments is that the gank to tank ratio will go to the later making solo/piracy pvp increasingly difficult. For thoughs who dont know that af's can kill and are killing bc's even with neuts applied, i am now stating this facted, and making t1 frigs like af's jsut seems crazy to me, and dont get me started on the af's. if tanks increase then in most cases you will need mroe than 1 ship to do this, meaning more small gangs/large/blobs even more common, then at a certain point it will jsut be the most people and tank online etc...
Almori	Posted - 2009.08.20 19:57:00 - [37] Originally by: Mason Briggs Edited by: Mason Briggs on 20/08/2009 19:50:08 I can't believe this... I really can't... I've just finished waiting for a month to do material research on a Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Bluprint... The point of this was to try out exploration and maybe make a few isk also... I just bought a Buzzard that i can't drive yet (will be able to in 6 days), so i couldn't rig it while waiting... And here they come and mess it all up... They take my blueprint and change it to the large version of the rig and crush my dreams ... I just realize I might not be in the right board to complain!!! Cause not only can't I fit it on my ship now but essentially the blueprint is now useless cause who in their right mind would rig a large vessel for exploration. They should have given us a choice or something... Is anyone as mad as me on this one? Is anyone I can complain to make my blueprint for frigates??? So, you're crying because you'll have to pay 10x less to rig your frig? I dont get it... also, your BPO's worth is nothing. it's not like it was a BS BPO ffs. Sooo... stuff?
Larkonis TrassIer Neo Spartans Laconian Syndicate	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:03:00 - [38] Originally by: Mason Briggs Edited by: Mason Briggs on 20/08/2009 19:50:08 I can't believe this... I really can't... I've just finished waiting for a month to do material research on a Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Bluprint... The point of this was to try out exploration and maybe make a few isk also... I just bought a Buzzard that i can't drive yet (will be able to in 6 days), so i couldn't rig it while waiting... And here they come and mess it all up... They take my blueprint and change it to the large version of the rig and crush my dreams ... I just realize I might not be in the right board to complain!!! Cause not only can't I fit it on my ship now but essentially the blueprint is now useless cause who in their right mind would rig a large vessel for exploration. They should have given us a choice or something... Is anyone as mad as me on this one? Is anyone I can complain to make my blueprint for frigates??? The BPO is worth like 500k. Cry more dawg. Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Navigator
Gavin DeVries	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:08:00 - [39] The BPO is about 112k, if I remember correctly. Mine is already researched. I think I'll have it framed, because he is right about one thing: unless they come up with some new hulls with probe bonuses, there will never be any significant demand for large gravcap rigs. There will be large demand for small ones, for all the covert ops and astrometrics frigates. There may be a small demand for medium ones, if some people are using a T3 cruiser as an exploration ship. ______________________________________________________ Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?
Mason Briggs	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:19:00 - [40] Edited by: Mason Briggs on 20/08/2009 20:19:39 Originally by: Almori Originally by: Mason Briggs Edited by: Mason Briggs on 20/08/2009 19:50:08 I can't believe this... I really can't... I've just finished waiting for a month to do material research on a Gravity Capacitor Upgrade I Bluprint... The point of this was to try out exploration and maybe make a few isk also... I just bought a Buzzard that i can't drive yet (will be able to in 6 days), so i couldn't rig it while waiting... And here they come and mess it all up... They take my blueprint and change it to the large version of the rig and crush my dreams ... I just realize I might not be in the right board to complain!!! Cause not only can't I fit it on my ship now but essentially the blueprint is now useless cause who in their right mind would rig a large vessel for exploration. They should have given us a choice or something... Is anyone as mad as me on this one? Is anyone I can complain to make my blueprint for frigates??? So, you're crying because you'll have to pay 10x less to rig your frig? I dont get it... also, your BPO's worth is nothing. it's not like it was a BS BPO ffs. Sooo... stuff? You're not the one with 30 of these things laying around in a hangar collecting dust because no one will buy them!!!
Annie Anomie Gallente Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:22:00 - [41] What my learned colleague is saying is it's a tank boost / increase in TTK across the board. I think I see the point. Mind you, does "can't fit on a ship because it's too expensive" = balanced to begin with?
Mystical Dawn Minmatar Nomadic Angels	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:24:00 - [42] Small rig build costs are about 500k to 1.2 M ISK with current prices..
Edward Mungrelson	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:30:00 - [43] You know, Proxyyyy, you are also allowed to fit rigs :)
Elvis Freeman	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:36:00 - [44] Rig patch is a direct boost to t1 cruiser Rig patch is a direct boost to t1 and t2 frigs
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:37:00 - [45] Originally by: Proxyyyy I would just like to open the floor to people who feel that their are serious down sides to making rigs more affordable... Does it not bother anyone and im speaking to thoughs who enjoy solo pvp mostly. That it will in many cases make destroying ships of frigate af and bc class very difficult increasing the time it would take to destroy them. Enabling a pilot to call for support or in most cases just tank u forever unless neuts where applied but still the argument is the same the engagment would last longer. Not only that it would seem that with added peral involved in such under taking then the only option pilots would be forced to have is flying in small gangs or large fleets to increase the chances of sucess in a short time to gtfo... What i enjoyed about eve pvp that it was fun and fast, you have to react very fast to circumstances and environments that change very rapidly in engagements that lasted within a short time frame. "To me it was like high speed chess" Also pvp in it self is expensive thoughs who fly as much as i do can testify to this. Introducing small rigs increases the cost of pvp by waht seems like to me 30 - 45 %. Now what fool woudnt adapted to new situations, and also buy small rigs to compete with lets say another t1 rifter pilot who in most likely is'nt so *****ed or lacks some sort of want for preservation like most " care bears/mission bears" taht they wudnt tank the fok out of that rifter. many wud make the same assumption, that not rigging your t1 ship "would be fail". I would just like other people's opinion. Obviously its not just about rigs the module it self but, how it affects pvp and how pvp in general seems to be getting nerfed with these "Changes". I fail to see a problem. We will see cheaper ships, and more rigged T1 ships. This is a boost to solo PVP if anything as one can afford to loose shisp more often. Saying enything else is thoughtless. In short: No big effects, at all. Other the somewhat vhepaer ships overall. So maby we will see more PvP (this is a good thing btw)? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.08.20 20:58:00 - [46] Originally by: Proxyyyy But my main arguments are increased cost of pvp, making rigs more afforable forces thoughs who woudnt think of rigging a t1 ship bc and lower are now forced to... I'm not sure I follow. By that logic, someone who just trained a weapons specializing skill for the first time would say, "Well damn. Now I'm forced to use T2, because it's more cost effective." Instead the general sentiment is (and imagine it'll be the same for rigs), "Sweet! Now I can fit that thing, and not go broke." Either way, it's cost you don't get back when your ship blows up, but goes a long way to make sure you don't get blown up in the first place. I'm assuming you don't PVP in T1 ships fit with Meta 0 modules, right? Why not rejoice?
Malcolm Roberts	Posted - 2009.08.20 23:37:00 - [47] Random thoughts: Now much more feasible to fit salvage tacklers to destroyers. Mission Drakes are cheaper for my corpmate who keeps getting them shot out from under him. Ninjas are going to be a lot busier.
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.08.21 00:43:00 - [48] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/08/2009 00:44:11 Originally by: Suitonia This. Oh and welcome back Branko, decided to resub recently? Yes, I've got back a week ago or so - finally got enough time to play EVE ;) Anyway, the OP is probably worried about the worse ISK dropped vs ISK cost of ships ratio - but it is not a problem for small ships, tbh. Even BCs, rigged (pre-patch) were generally profitable ships even solo if you were careful enough and bothered to ransom when/if possible. Now it's going to be slightly easier for us. I'd always support better % of modules dropped of course. A new solo player can always get in a cheap anti-frig ship and make solid ISK that way. I've been toying about with a arty thrasher recently to get back in the scheme of things, preety fun killing T2 frigs. Also, tank on sub BC ships is a bit meh nomatter how you rig it (so gank v tank out of balance is not really a concern). Unless it's a Maller or some special bait fit - but those were rigged even before. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Velin Shade	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:05:00 - [49] Originally by: Roland Deschaines 3. He puts CCC on a combat Rifter. Agreed, the Op has no business commenting on pvp matters.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:11:00 - [50] Is the OP aware that a cap booster allows you to dual SAR tank the Rifter, rigged or no?
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:21:00 - [51] Originally by: Velin Shade Originally by: Roland Deschaines 3. He puts CCC on a combat Rifter. Agreed, the Op has no business commenting on pvp matters. It makes sense if its in the pure tackle role. I was messing about on the test server with the new rigs and came up with this super low budget fit to tackle neuting bs until the gang arrives. 14 cap per second regen will keep your point and mwd going strong unless his neut cycle hits right before your point cycle but thats just the way it goes. But you can turn the point right back on so as long as he was not aligned and up to speed you will be good to go. [Rifter, Anti-neut] Capacitor Power Relay I Capacitor Power Relay I Capacitor Power Relay I Warp Disruptor II Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Phased Monopropellant I Hydrazine Boosters 125mm Gatling AutoCannon I, EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon I, EMP S 125mm Gatling AutoCannon I, EMP S Rocket Launcher I, Gremlin Rocket Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Capacitor Control Circuit I Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:23:00 - [52] Quote: 14 cap per second regen will keep your point and mwd Why would you keep the MWD going?
Tortugan F9X	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:29:00 - [53] How about you all just quit whining and play the f*cking game?
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:46:00 - [54] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: 14 cap per second regen will keep your point and mwd Why would you keep the MWD going? Because you are kiting out at 20ish km and need the high trans to outrun the majority of drone and missile dps. This is not an orbit at 500 with scram fit that dies to a web. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 01:54:00 - [55] Quote: Because you are kiting out at 20ish km and need the high trans to outrun the majority of drone and missile dps. This is not an orbit at 500 with scram fit that dies to a web. Please tell me you're joking. You will take VASTLY MORE damage from missiles with your MWD on. The only drones you can outrun with a Rifter will be mediums...and most any target will put lights on you.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:11:00 - [56] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Because you are kiting out at 20ish km and need the high trans to outrun the majority of drone and missile dps. This is not an orbit at 500 with scram fit that dies to a web. Please tell me you're joking. You will take VASTLY MORE damage from missiles with your MWD on. The only drones you can outrun with a Rifter will be mediums...and most any target will put lights on you. Worked at the ffa1 where there were plenty of angry bs with drones and missiles galore. Didn't have any issues tanking any of it even with multiple neuts on me. Drakes, cerbs and nighthawks were a bit painful but not enough solo to keep me from holding them for a few minutes. Its was pretty much perma point for any bs I latched onto. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:13:00 - [57] Quote: Worked at the ffa1 where there were plenty of angry bs with drones and missiles galore. Didn't have any issues tanking any of it even with multiple neuts on me. Drakes, cerbs and nighthawks were a bit painful but not enough solo to keep me from holding them for a few minutes. Its was pretty much perma point for any bs I latched onto. Irrelevant. You will take more damage from missiles with the MWD active. IF you were tanking the drones, they were probably sending hammerheads or something at you which is loltastic.
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:19:00 - [58] Edited by: Davinel Lulinvega on 21/08/2009 02:25:41 Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Worked at the ffa1 where there were plenty of angry bs with drones and missiles galore. Didn't have any issues tanking any of it even with multiple neuts on me. Drakes, cerbs and nighthawks were a bit painful but not enough solo to keep me from holding them for a few minutes. Its was pretty much perma point for any bs I latched onto. Irrelevant. You will take more damage from missiles with the MWD active. IF you were tanking the drones, they were probably sending hammerheads or something at you which is loltastic. Actually you do take less with mwd on. Unlike guns, the larger sig radius doesn't cancel out the high speed due to the way the missile formula works. Likewise low speed can't make up for tiny sig radius. Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke! inb4 stealth edit
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:20:00 - [59] Quote: Actually you do take less with mwd on. Unlike guns, the larger sig radius doesn't cancel out the small speed due to the way the missile formula works. Likewise low speed can't make up for tiny sig radius. Except sig radius is more important than speed with the new missile formula.
techzer0 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:27:00 - [60] Originally by: Proxyyyy But my main arguments are increased cost of pvp, making rigs more afforable forces thoughs who woudnt think of rigging a t1 ship bc and lower are now forced to, and if anyone of you pvp alot you know this increase would mean less time pvp and more time making isk, than pvp'ing as for rigs everyone knows damage rigs are not even close to as usefull as thoughs that increase tank I.E. speed/active/passive You have no idea how many kills on tank rigged ships I get with damage rigs fit to mine... heck I kill rigged ships with unrigged ones all the time (yay me?) Not gonna change much mate, really ------------ Originally by: Nexus Kinnon I could outgay you even without my pink tutu. >.>
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:31:00 - [61] Originally by: Kahega Amielden IF you were tanking the drones, they were probably sending hammerheads or something at you which is loltastic. Warriors mostly but they only hit once or twice when they catch up as they immediatly try to orbit and fall behind. Tanked them just fine. Strangely enough the hammerhead II did the most damage as they would hit really hard several times on the approach due to the slower speed but again no real problems tanking it. Remember I'm shooting them to pieces as they close range. But that thermal hole the hammers exploit could be patched up with a thermal resist rig instead of a ccc I guess. Maybe you should try it yourself? Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.08.21 02:35:00 - [62] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Actually you do take less with mwd on. Unlike guns, the larger sig radius doesn't cancel out the small speed due to the way the missile formula works. Likewise low speed can't make up for tiny sig radius. Except sig radius is more important than speed with the new missile formula. Instead of posting generalizations you could just work through the formula and see that I'm right. Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke! inb4 stealth edit
Rumba Purring	Posted - 2009.08.21 04:05:00 - [63] BECAUSE OF BLACKBIRDS! Imagine an EVE universe where every T1 Blackbird cruiser is fitted with 2 ECM strength rigs. Good ECM on the cheap. ------------- Would you be ready if the gravity reversed itself?
Manu Hermanus FaDoyToy	Posted - 2009.08.21 04:11:00 - [64] Originally by: techzer0 Originally by: Proxyyyy But my main arguments are increased cost of pvp, making rigs more afforable forces thoughs who woudnt think of rigging a t1 ship bc and lower are now forced to, and if anyone of you pvp alot you know this increase would mean less time pvp and more time making isk, than pvp'ing as for rigs everyone knows damage rigs are not even close to as usefull as thoughs that increase tank I.E. speed/active/passive You have no idea how many kills on tank rigged ships I get with damage rigs fit to mine... heck I kill rigged ships with unrigged ones all the time (yay me?) Not gonna change much mate, really I agree with tech, because he is way more awesome then just about anyone else on the forums. oh and he also happens to be right. and lol, cheaper rigs lead to increased cost in pvp
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.21 05:55:00 - [65] Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Actually you do take less with mwd on. Unlike guns, the larger sig radius doesn't cancel out the small speed due to the way the missile formula works. Likewise low speed can't make up for tiny sig radius. Except sig radius is more important than speed with the new missile formula. Instead of posting generalizations you could just work through the formula and see that I'm right. Confirming that speed of targets is vastly more important than sig for MISSILES. Basically, everything comes default nanod from the getgo.
Niko Takahashi	Posted - 2009.08.21 06:26:00 - [66] Originally by: Hidden Snake Well what is ccp doing wrong that they are killing small gang solo warfare by permanent increase of tank of the ships and nerfing gank. This is strategy to help new players, but it kills the best part of pvp. Lets see what happens with this ¦rig my rifter¦ frenzy now. And what in the world is forcing you not to use the ganky rigs? Was a long time needed change in my opinion and will seee how it works out as CCP said the prices of the rigs will be subject to adjustment. Current state is not set in stone so lets see how it works out before we start run around like headless chikens and whine about it
Niko Takahashi	Posted - 2009.08.21 06:32:00 - [67] Originally by: Rumba Purring BECAUSE OF BLACKBIRDS! Imagine an EVE universe where every T1 Blackbird cruiser is fitted with 2 ECM strength rigs. Good ECM on the cheap. Caldari cruiser 5 check ecm skills check Wohoo
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.21 06:42:00 - [68] Originally by: Niko Takahashi Originally by: Rumba Purring BECAUSE OF BLACKBIRDS! Imagine an EVE universe where every T1 Blackbird cruiser is fitted with 2 ECM strength rigs. Good ECM on the cheap. Caldari cruiser 5 check ecm skills check Wohoo Enemy using new faction implants that give a +75 % sensor strength bonus, check.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.08.21 06:46:00 - [69] Originally by: Niko Takahashi Originally by: Rumba Purring BECAUSE OF BLACKBIRDS! Imagine an EVE universe where every T1 Blackbird cruiser is fitted with 2 ECM strength rigs. Good ECM on the cheap. Caldari cruiser 5 check ecm skills check Wohoo Indeed. Despite what techzer0 correctly said about people already generally using rigs in pvp I think this will usher in everybody using rigs on all ships at all times. I mean the bill of materials is so lulz low on small and medium rigs you could probably rig up several ships off one level 4 missions salvage. That out of the box neut resistant rifter fit is just the beggining of the toy box ccp has opened for us to play with. Td rifters with tracking diagnostic rigs anyone or arbitrators with a full rack of egress port maximisers to make them truely a budget curse? The potential is endless atm. Quote: [03:39:05] Emperor Salazar > HOLY **** ITS ZEBA [03:39:20] Emperor Salazar > NEVER STOP POASTING
Allaera Caldari Star Phukkers Incorporated	Posted - 2009.08.21 09:24:00 - [70] Edited by: Allaera on 21/08/2009 09:26:04 OP, I really don't see cheaper rigs being an issue. I mean, pre-patch, did you know with absolute certainty that a ship you engaged was rigged or not? I'll bet the answer is no. Now, however, you can more than likely guarantee that ANY ship you come across will be rigged and, as such, you now have more options to fit/rig accordingly. Now I think about it there will be so many options now that there is still NO absolute certainty as to what you will be facing so, strictly speaking, not a damn thing will have changed. In closing may I offer this piece of advice?.... Adapt or die!! *edited for spellamerization
H3llHound Blacksteel Mining and Manufacturing	Posted - 2009.08.21 09:30:00 - [71] Originally by: Mason Briggs You're not the one with 30 of these things laying around in a hangar collecting dust because no one will buy them!!! OMG if only there was a thing called reprocessing it would save me from making useless posts.
0zimandius The Nietzian Way	Posted - 2009.08.21 11:09:00 - [72] were BSs not dead enough? i guess add this to the ever growing list of pointless development. thx 0zi with a zero
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.08.21 11:42:00 - [73] Originally by: Niko Takahashi Originally by: Hidden Snake Well what is ccp doing wrong that they are killing small gang solo warfare by permanent increase of tank of the ships and nerfing gank. This is strategy to help new players, but it kills the best part of pvp. Lets see what happens with this ¦rig my rifter¦ frenzy now. And what in the world is forcing you not to use the ganky rigs? Was a long time needed change in my opinion and will seee how it works out as CCP said the prices of the rigs will be subject to adjustment. Current state is not set in stone so lets see how it works out before we start run around like headless chikens and whine about it The fact tah weapon rigs are nearly worthless and help nothign inprove offensiveness of ships. They are pathetic 10% bonuses that are stack nerfed against 10+10% bonuses damage mods. Also the weapon rigs make harder to fit top tier guns.. reducing the dps... (coutner intuitive huh?) On other hand tankign rigs like trimarks are not stack nerfed at all and the active tank rigs do not compete with any NORMAL module. THerefore rigs massively boost defense while adding NOTHING to offensive. CCP should rethink a lot of things. First Weapon rigs must be done MUCH more interesting. Make things with REAL bonuses and penalties. Like 20% ROF bonus but with a 15% TRACKING penalty. THings liek 25% DAMAGE bonus but with a 10% ROF penalty.. That OR make them not stack nerfed against modules (only rig-rig stack nerfing) ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Sergeant Shafto Caldari BulletProof Monks Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2009.08.21 12:15:00 - [74] Edited by: Sergeant Shafto on 21/08/2009 12:16:23 lol to people saying this makes pvp MORE expensive! Any even semi-serious pvper already had to rig all BCs, HACs, BS, CS etc etc. The only things that aren't usually rigged, which now will be, are intys and AFs. Overall, this means that PvP is much cheaper since rigging BCs and HACs took up a lot of PvP's cost. Large rig prices may also drop since demand for them will drop massively now only BS sized ships will need them. That would mean rigged BS prices will remain either roughly the same or will drop too. If you PvP in t1 frigs and cruisers then you were already PvPing incredibly cheaply and limiting yourself, mostly, to targetting other small and cheap ships and this won't change. Moreover, if you feel you are forced to rig your t1 frigs and cruisers now to compete with other t1 frigs and cruiser, the rigs you have to buy are stupidly cheap anyway! Especially small rigs which will cost less than 1 mil. So basically: PvP will barely change, the major thing that will change is that the cost of PvP will drop since rigging ships will be far cheaper. The only people who would complain about this are stupidly rich elitists who don't want others to be able to afford more PvP than they previously could.
Gartel Reiman Civis Romanus Sum Pax Romana Alliance	Posted - 2009.08.21 13:09:00 - [75] Edited by: Gartel Reiman on 21/08/2009 13:10:42 Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega Unlike guns, the larger sig radius doesn't cancel out the high speed due to the way the missile formula works. Likewise low speed can't make up for tiny sig radius. Originally by: Soporo Confirming that speed of targets is vastly more important than sig for MISSILES. Neither of these are really true. The only time that speed appears in the formula, it's divided by sig. So if you're travelling 5 times as fast with 5 times the sig, you'll get no damage reduction from your speed. In this sense missile damage does work the same as guns regarding outrunning the damage. It does mean that typically you'll get a little more damage mitigation with the MWD on, due to the effects of the Acceleration Control skill. However, depending on the missile it may be the case that the majority of your damage reduction previously came from your low sig, which was an absolute measurement. Thus you lose this regardless and probably gain only a tiny bit of "speed tanking"; probably a net loss overall (i.e. you take more damage). Edit: I was going to run the numbers for heavy/cruise missiles vs. a Rifter, but without EFT here actually applying skills to the explosion velocities/ship velocity/etc. is tedius. Thus I leave it as an exercise for the reader.
Lyris Nairn Caldari Synthetic Frontiers	Posted - 2009.08.21 13:30:00 - [76] Hi, I came in here to say this: when I read the OP's title, How the new "Multi-Sized Rigs system" may or may not ruin pvp, this was translated in my mind to, I have no clue how the new "Multi-Sized Rigs system" will affect pvp. With that in mind, I didn't even bother to read the OP. Quick word of advice: if you have an opinion to state (which perhaps you don't), it does not present a very convincing argument to him-haw around it with your post's title being ambiguous at best and expressive of your complete ignorance on the issue at worst. Thank you everyone else for your time. -- "Quite possibly the nicest person who'd ever want to kill you."
Cearain	Posted - 2009.08.21 14:22:00 - [77] The more I mess around with eft and simple tech 1 frigates the more I tend to see the ops point and what Kagura Nikon is saying. I don't care about the increase cost of fitting frigs if the rigs cost indeed ends up where ccp hopes. However, 1on1 frig fights may be pointless. With that rifter tanking 60 dps (with not allot of skills required I might add) its going to be hard to fit another t1 frigate that can take it down before downtime. The same seems to be for the case for punishers and other commonly used frigs. I'm not a that experienced a player but I'm not seeing what gank rigs are going to do more good than the tank rigs. (In other words going with the gank rigs just insures you won't win the solo fight) So indeed the chances of getting solo fights (at least with t1 frigs) that can end before downtime may become a thing of the past. We can't predict the future but I think CCP should watch for this. But I will still say that even if this ends up being the case, I think they should keep the cheaper small rigs and do other tweaks to increase gank.
Davinel Lulinvega	Posted - 2009.08.21 14:28:00 - [78] Originally by: Gartel Reiman Edited by: Gartel Reiman on 21/08/2009 13:10:42 Originally by: Davinel Lulinvega Unlike guns, the larger sig radius doesn't cancel out the high speed due to the way the missile formula works. Likewise low speed can't make up for tiny sig radius. Originally by: Soporo Confirming that speed of targets is vastly more important than sig for MISSILES. Neither of these are really true. The only time that speed appears in the formula, it's divided by sig. So if you're travelling 5 times as fast with 5 times the sig, you'll get no damage reduction from your speed. In this sense missile damage does work the same as guns regarding outrunning the damage. It does mean that typically you'll get a little more damage mitigation with the MWD on, due to the effects of the Acceleration Control skill. However, depending on the missile it may be the case that the majority of your damage reduction previously came from your low sig, which was an absolute measurement. Thus you lose this regardless and probably gain only a tiny bit of "speed tanking"; probably a net loss overall (i.e. you take more damage). Edit: I was going to run the numbers for heavy/cruise missiles vs. a Rifter, but without EFT here actually applying skills to the explosion velocities/ship velocity/etc. is tedius. Thus I leave it as an exercise for the reader. Once again, work through the formula yourself instead of making generalizations. I will admit that I did make one mistake in my original post. Larger sig actually can make up for small speed, but low speed cannot make up for small sig. Originally by: CCP Tuxford Now the op looks like a weirdo that can't read kekekeke! inb4 stealth edit
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:03:00 - [79] Edited by: Proxyyyy on 21/08/2009 15:04:10 It seem i always have to explain myself again. Competition driving force behind innovation, one person lowers their price others follow to compete. More so for eve cause thier is not what econoist like to call value added, every module is made to a quality of and dimision that make the indisguisable from others made the deferring parties. For example; a (Pink damage controle 2) may cost more than a regular none colored damage control Now this isnt anything new or a rare its seen everywhere in the world today. If one person buys these cheap rigs which are way more accessible it actually raises the cost associated with pvp, its like if prada made a low end hand bag for poor people which is 300 compared to 1000 it may seem like you are saving money but realy if you wudnt think about buying it before cause of cost that would cost you nothing cause its not worth it at its current price your savings are 100% while now they made a more accessible version of said brand the savings are more like 70% you spent money where before you wouldnt. At current market prices in (Rens) t1 rigs have a (cost/building associated rigs) of around 600, 000 this is a fact. Now i base this on current component/market prices in rens, what the end products mark up will be i dont know but im lets say im supposing most people who pvp build their own rigs = /. Then the cost increase like i said will be around 30 - 45% so essence they have increased the cost of pvp. people will have to put small rigs to compete or they fail...
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:17:00 - [80] Ok Like i said before these changes will not affect cruisers or bs class they will most likely remain the same it will just make flying cruiser i.e. none drone/missile boats fail and allow t1 frigates to increase their ability to kill ships bc and bellow... The t1 cruiser class is the hardest to fly cause bs and below can track them and frigates can run under their tracking thanks to the web nerf... Meh to thoughs who hav flown rifters solo low and null sec and hav killed t2 inties t1 frigates and t1 cruisers given time, you would know cap is a prob with webs applied med drones can indeed track u and catch hit you nuets can be ****ed too. Even duel repped with cap injecter small nos and ccc the setup is not cap stable so one without ccc will be even less cap stable i know this cause ive tried the setup multiple times and its a lot of mirco'ing cap turning stuff off and on while scaning for the pwn to com = / and i primarly use it to fight t2 frigs and t1 destroyers... So now with this new system in place a general rifter fit that did cost around 6 - 8 mill now cost 9 - 11 mill, now tell me that isnt an increase in cost to pvp... Also i dont rig t1 stuff and laugh at the dudes i pwn who do and fail makes the ownage even mroe funny yes people rig their t1 stuff but it isnt the norm and is looked down on. Rigging t1 stuff bc and above being the acception of course, but now thanks to these "change" rigging t1 cruiser and below will be the norm "shoot im gunna do it too, got my bluprints and making them right now = )"
Cearain	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:22:00 - [81] Edited by: Cearain on 21/08/2009 15:22:40 Proxyyy I guardedly agree with your second to last post. It may make flying frigs more expensive - assuming you intend to use it on solo fights. If you are just using it in a fleet I'm not sure I would rig it. But the cost of a tech1 frig is still pretty low even if you do add 3 mill for rigs. But also consider that many who now fly BS's might start flying BCs. This would make for somewhat less costly pvp. In the end though I do suspect your right that this will be somewhat of an isk sink. But that may be good for the overall economy and eve, I don't know. A pirate may be thinking the costs of flying ship just went up but the rigs canÆt be recovered as loot. If this is a problem ccp can do things like have less loot destroyed when a ship is blown up. I really don't know enough to comment on what is good or bad for the eve economy but there are likely many other fixes besides making rigs too expensive for most ships.
dibblebill Beyond Our Sins	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:30:00 - [82] Sorry, Proxxxyy, I disagree. Except the super tanks, like Drakes, which ahve always been rigged, small ship combat is still fast and furious. I've fought rigged Rifters pre-patch. Beat one, but that was failfit, but they still went down fast. I always rigged my assault sihps. I see no real difference, honestly. --Don't feed trolls.
dibblebill Beyond Our Sins	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:33:00 - [83] Originally by: Kagura Nikon CCP should rethink a lot of things. First Weapon rigs must be done MUCH more interesting. Make things with REAL bonuses and penalties. Like 20% ROF bonus but with a 15% TRACKING penalty. THings liek 25% DAMAGE bonus but with a 10% ROF penalty.. That OR make them not stack nerfed against modules (only rig-rig stack nerfing) They alraedy stated they are reworking the weapon rigs. --Don't feed trolls.
Per Vert Codito Ergo Sum	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:46:00 - [84] So let me get this right. Your crying because the carebear rifter you wanna gank in a belt has 45% more shields? Sorry, I guess this patch negatively impacts your playstyle, you amazing pvper.
Flinchey Amarr	Posted - 2009.08.21 15:47:00 - [85] wtb less price gouging seriously. it's NOT costing you 4m isk to make a t1 small rig, dont price it like that you greedy f****s ED: in fact, i might as well get in on this, 100k isk for a 2m sell probably , why not ;)
Proxyyyy Caldari Aenigmata	Posted - 2009.08.21 16:23:00 - [86] Edited by: Proxyyyy on 21/08/2009 16:23:39 First off all dibble damn U!!!!!!!!!!!!!! naw jking mind u i already know this wont affect us cause we are not short on isk, rofl u even more i wud think so flying around with ur tengu = ) i hope somone reads this and bloows it up = ) Again this has nothing to do with large/blobs fleets hi sec wars, people that engage in these activities dont even com close to pvp'ing as most in low sec do.. Not only am i in the minmatar milltia i also pirate so i do the blob thing for easy kills and if i want increased quality of fights i go solo/piracy. Now many people who know me will tell you i pvp alot 12 hours a day and cost is a concerns me even though i have alot of money, im by far not the only one that pvp's that much... "STARTING RANT NOW" Manufactures and missioners have been boasted so many times that i always find it crazy that they com on other threads tryna flame a thread that wud like to boast a part of the game that a minority in game enjoys pirates/mercs if they still around = / and fw. "Rant DONE" What is the issue here, like most in low sec and null sec i want more players leaving hi/sec and coming to low/sec. I would like more and new players becoming pirates/mercs/privateers and joing fw, this is about protecting pvp cause im not the only one realizing that its getting worse and worse. Im concerned that for newer players the cost of pvp went up, which means less time learning the art and enjoying it. The fact that the dudes that talk about pvp on forums only every realy did it in a fleet and dont know that t1 frigs are beating taranis's and other interceptors beacause of the scram boast. they dont or cant believe its possible for a t1 frigate to beat a t2 hac LULZ they dont know that in most cases its better to fly a t1 counter part that t2 well atleast more cost affective. destroyers are still considerd garbage but thrashers hav been pwning t2 frigs for a while now in most cases realy only in large fleets its better to fly a destroyer than an assault ship. Same with cruisers ruptures and hav been pwning hacs/recons for a while now and thats not saying much when u catch them = / Pvp is fun at times hard most of the time and exciting you that you couldnt imaging jsut by reading and hearing about it, Solo pvp is like a club for the elite which is fun i guess = / but so little people realy do it you become a rarity in a game where most people do the others profession or hav done it at one point. Most manufactures and pilots that have done the whole boring 0.0 thing have ended their eve careers in low sec pirating and being mercs jsut pvp'ing in general and will telll you that they should have done it from the beginning. The title of this thread wasnt as over the top as i was first gunna write it at first i was gunna vent but then i was like u know its a forum and this is my first thread made ever on these boards cause i dont do the forum thing and before this thread i only posted 3 times ever before this. when i was thinking bout making this thread at first i thought i was jsut angry and maybe crazy but turns out im not and other people see it = )
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 16:24:00 - [87] Quote: seriously. it's NOT costing you 4m isk to make a t1 small rig, dont price it like that you greedy f**s supply and demand. If you don't want to pay 4m ISK for a small rig, don't **ing pay 4m ISK for a small rig. Go without for a few hours while prices stabilize or just grab the BPO and build it yourself.
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.21 16:43:00 - [88] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: seriously. it's NOT costing you 4m isk to make a t1 small rig, dont price it like that you greedy f**s supply and demand. If you don't want to pay 4m ISK for a small rig, don't **ing pay 4m ISK for a small rig. Go without for a few hours while prices stabilize or just grab the BPO and build it yourself. Bollox. Since all rig sized use the same mats, the prices are going to scale almost completely linearly. If they don't, people will buy their own BPOs for 200k isk and make their own rigs until prices drop in line. The only way we have 4m isk small rigs is if BS sized trimarks become 60-70m There are FAR too many mission runners for this to happen. The biggest price hike would be ~10% tops. Demand will go up, but the increase in materials will be minuscule.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:04:00 - [89] Quote: Bollox. Since all rig sized use the same mats, the prices are going to scale almost completely linearly. If they don't, people will buy their own BPOs for 200k isk and make their own rigs until prices drop in line. Prices are determined by supply and demand, not just production cost. They sell for what people will pay for them, not just above what it costs to produce them. Quote: The only way we have 4m isk small rigs is if BS sized trimarks become 60-70m Irrelevant. If people will pay 4m ISK for a small trimark then they will sell for 4m. Take an economics class.
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:19:00 - [90] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 21/08/2009 17:19:08 Originally by: Kahega Amielden Irrelevant. If people will pay 4m ISK for a small trimark then they will sell for 4m. Take an economics class. Fail on two counts. (a) With 11ty billion competitors and no cartel or legislation to prevent dumping prices, they will sell for production cost + small margin, much like all T1 items. (b) It takes just a few clicks to produce these rigs far cheaper, so people have no incentive to pay 4M ISK when it takes about 15 minutes of industry skills to do better. You will note that in EVE after prices stabilize on a item, it is always cheaper to buy off the market then produce with level 1 industry skills and materials off the market. RL economics fails to apply to non-T1 costs, because production is not such a trivial business that anyone with half a brain and two spare seconds can do. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:20:00 - [91] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: Bollox. Since all rig sized use the same mats, the prices are going to scale almost completely linearly. If they don't, people will buy their own BPOs for 200k isk and make their own rigs until prices drop in line. Prices are determined by supply and demand, not just production cost. They sell for what people will pay for them, not just above what it costs to produce them. Quote: The only way we have 4m isk small rigs is if BS sized trimarks become 60-70m Irrelevant. If people will pay 4m ISK for a small trimark then they will sell for 4m. Take an economics class. People won't pay 4m ISK for a small trimark. The fact that they can produce it themselves with little to no effort requires for a fraction of the price pretty much guarantees that. New players aren't going to pay over 10m in rigs for a 300k hull, and older players probably won't either knowing the build cost. With BPOs readily available for every joe shmoe, the margin will shrink in no time. How many mission runners are there in eve? And how many of them "produce" salvage? If people see a big markup on small rigs the market will flood and then just return itself to equilibrium. Mission runners are always looking at ways to make more isk. They will, too, for a while, until everyone and their mother makes small rigs and the profit margin shrinks to that of large rigs.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:36:00 - [92] Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 21/08/2009 17:36:51 Quote: (a) With 11ty billion competitors and no cartel or legislation to prevent dumping prices, they will sell for production cost + small margin, much like all T1 items. No **. That's because people will undercut each other; no one will pay 4m for a rig if someone else sells it for 3m. Quote: (b) It takes just a few clicks to produce these rigs far cheaper, so people have no incentive to pay 4M ISK when it takes about 15 minutes of industry skills to do better. You will note that in EVE after prices stabilize on a item, it is always cheaper to buy off the market then produce with level 1 industry skills and materials off the market. You're missing the point entirely. YES OR NO, the person who put the small rig up for 4m did so because he believed people would pay that price for the item? Quote: People won't pay 4m ISK for a small trimark. The fact that they can produce it themselves with little to no effort requires for a fraction of the price pretty much guarantees that. Except people are dumb and impatient. Quote: How many mission runners are there in eve? And how many of them "produce" salvage? If people see a big markup on small rigs the market will flood and then just return itself to equilibrium**. Yes. That's correct. Aka supply and demand (Supply increases, price falls). I never said they would stay that way, I was giving a reason for people selling them at 4m currently.
Seriously Bored Minmatar	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:43:00 - [93] Edited by: Seriously Bored on 21/08/2009 17:45:44 Originally by: Proxyyyy Now this isnt anything new or a rare its seen everywhere in the world today. If one person buys these cheap rigs which are way more accessible it actually raises the cost associated with pvp, its like if prada made a low end hand bag for poor people which is 300 compared to 1000 it may seem like you are saving money but realy if you wudnt think about buying it before cause of cost that would cost you nothing cause its not worth it at its current price your savings are 100% while now they made a more accessible version of said brand the savings are more like 70% you spent money where before you wouldnt. Yeap. Major failure in logic here. The different being: people DO think about buying that handbag. Before this patch, people thought about fitting the rigs. They just didn't do it before, because it was no where near worth the price. Yes, each rig is about as expensive as the frig you put it on. But how much did your T2 fit for that frig cost? Is it really all that much more expensive, once you look at the fitting as a whole? Small rigs increased the cost of the cheapest part of PVP. It ain't hard to make a million isk. The Garmon's of the world were rigging their cruisers before the patch anyway. And it decreased the cost of PVP for Battlecruisers...at least for the people who were doing the killing before. EDIT: And about the 4mil price tag on small rigs. I've already had the urge to make a bunch of my own and sell 'em for 3.9mil ;) Quick, everyone on the bandwagon! We'll have stable prices in no time.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:54:00 - [94] Originally by: dibblebill Originally by: Kagura Nikon CCP should rethink a lot of things. First Weapon rigs must be done MUCH more interesting. Make things with REAL bonuses and penalties. Like 20% ROF bonus but with a 15% TRACKING penalty. THings liek 25% DAMAGE bonus but with a 10% ROF penalty.. That OR make them not stack nerfed against modules (only rig-rig stack nerfing) They alraedy stated they are reworking the weapon rigs. And since when was the last time they hit the nail without US the community force steering them into it? ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
AstroPhobic Divine Retribution	Posted - 2009.08.21 17:57:00 - [95] Originally by: Kahega Amielden Quote: How many mission runners are there in eve? And how many of them "produce" salvage? If people see a big markup on small rigs the market will flood and then just return itself to equilibrium. Yes. That's correct. Aka supply and demand (Supply increases, price falls). I never said they would stay that way, I was giving a reason for people selling them at 4m currently. I guess there was just misunderstanding. I thought someone was saying small rigs will sit at 4m isk. My bad.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar The Black Dawn Gang	Posted - 2009.08.21 18:28:00 - [96] Funny is when things go wrong way. When marauders were released.. they costed 700M isk.. and peopel whined. And others said.. wait.. they will eventually drop in price. I bought one on the first week for 690M isk. Now that they are 1.2 BIl isk .. I am very glad that I was too anxious :P ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Wongdong Minmatar	Posted - 2009.08.21 19:16:00 - [97] whaaaaaa....my targets will be tougher or actually fight back now. i want it the old way when it wasn't such a challenge.now i might have to think up new strategies instead of target>pew>dead>collect... why do you have to make things tougher for us piwats CCP? Originally by: CCP Whisper So you're going to have to do some actual thinking
Letifer Deus Bannable Offense. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.08.21 21:18:00 - [98] Edited by: Letifer Deus on 21/08/2009 21:20:10 Originally by: Psiri downsides 1) an undeserved indirect nerf to BS Agreed. Quote: 2) nerf to cheapfits, as rigs now will be commonly used by everyone The med and especially small rigs are so damn cheap it really has no effect on anyone that isn't a complete pauper. Quote: Benefitting players who already were always rigging their ships anyway This was the first thing I thought of when I heard the changes, except my thought went "goddmnit, now rigging my taranis/ishkur isn't going to give me any advantage because everyone will be doing it." Putting aux thrusters on taranis used to help make up for the lower base speed and catch other inties which are mostly not rigged. Now I will lose most of that advantage as even if I were to fit T2 aux thrusters the difference increase is much, much smaller. Originally by:* Kagura Nikon Funny is when things go wrong way. When marauders were released.. they costed 700M isk.. and peopel whined. And others said.. wait.. they will eventually drop in price. I bought one on the first week for 690M isk. Now that they are 1.2 BIl isk .. I am very glad that I was too anxious :P There was a little thing that happened a while ago concerning some POSs with mysterious abilities that might have had something to do with the huge increase in marauder (and all T2 ship) prices. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Brought to you by the letter ARRR!"
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.22 04:32:00 - [99] As for the smaller rigs = more tank and not so much gank idea, that's sounds about right. Also, never forget that CCP is still in the "make combat take longer" buisness. Devs said it plenty of times in the past and multiple nerfs/boosts prove it.
JCache Caldari	Posted - 2009.08.22 07:58:00 - [100] Originally by: Letifer Deus This was the first thing I thought of when I heard the changes, except my thought went "godd*mnit, now rigging my taranis/ishkur isn't going to give me any advantage because everyone will be doing it." Putting aux thrusters on taranis used to help make up for the lower base speed and catch other inties which are mostly not rigged. Now I will lose most of that advantage as even if I were to fit T2 aux thrusters the difference increase is much, much smaller. That! And fitting T2 rigs will most likely get a lot more expensive even with the reduced materials for smaller ships. Virtually every ship I own will have to be rerigged to T2 in order to stay competitive. Since T1 rigs are the news standard now, the advantage over "conventional" fitting was nerfed from 10% to about 4.5%... this is huge for the massive amount of ISK you have to invest. Sig removed. Needs more EVE related content. Zymurgist
DraconisAlpha	Posted - 2009.08.22 11:39:00 - [101] What i think is that the problem will be isk loss... now pvp doesn't pay, too much items get destroyed and even if you have a killing rate of 2:1/3:1 you will never (never!) gain more than what you lose. With rigs this will be even more evident. A rifter costs 250k, you will have to spend 2kk in rigs if you wanna beat other rifters...but that increase your ship's cost, so... I'm a pvper, and I cannot live only with money I make in pvp...what can I do NOW? and what will I have to do after small rigs?
z0de Gallente The Bastards The Bastards.	Posted - 2009.08.22 12:29:00 - [102] Edited by: z0de on 22/08/2009 12:30:02 This thread seems to be about really poor guys who still wont buy rigs complaining at the slightly less poor guys who didn't buy rigs before but will now. Meanwhile those who always rigged everything smile that things got a bit cheaper. Originally by: DraconisAlpha I'm a pvper, and I cannot live only with money I make in pvp...what can I do NOW? and what will I have to do after small rigs? suck less? á á
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity	Posted - 2009.08.22 12:59:00 - [103] Originally by: DraconisAlpha What i think is that the problem will be isk loss... now pvp doesn't pay, too much items get destroyed and even if you have a killing rate of 2:1/3:1 you will never (never!) gain more than what you lose. With rigs this will be even more evident. A rifter costs 250k, you will have to spend 2kk in rigs if you wanna beat other rifters...but that increase your ship's cost, so... I'm a pvper, and I cannot live only with money I make in pvp...what can I do NOW? and what will I have to do after small rigs? My wallet, it disagrees. Also, for small ships, the rigging costs add only about 30-40% extra cost to a T2 fit, even less on a destroyer. It's trivial to make ISK flying sub-cruiser T1 ships. Btw, you're blessed with another important thing in a destroyer/frigate; fast locking time. That means you can occasionally catch and ransom a pod of someone who is either lagging or doesn't know better, providing even more income. Also, when a AF or such is completely helpless vs you, the sensible thing to do is to charge them a ransom rather then pop them. With current AF prices it's very much worth it, and the many AB lolfits make it easy to ransom them with impunity. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa Minmatar The Perfect Harvesting Experience	Posted - 2009.08.22 13:21:00 - [104] Originally by: ISK Launderer CONFIRMED, THIS WILL RUIN ALL PVP. THIS PATCH NEEDS TO BE ROLLED BACK NOW OR THE CAREBEARS HAVE WON EVE. \o/ I win EVE ! ----------------------------------------------- Originally by: Paper Rock's fine, nerf Scissors
Pater Peccavi Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2009.08.22 14:00:00 - [105] Originally by: Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa Originally by: ISK Launderer CONFIRMED, THIS WILL RUIN ALL PVP. THIS PATCH NEEDS TO BE ROLLED BACK NOW OR THE CAREBEARS HAVE WON EVE. \o/ I win EVE ! Agreed, all those carebears running L4's in frigates will be greatly pleased by this patch. ______ Why has the number of players online dropped from 50k to 25k? BECAUSE OF SWINE FLU
The Djego Minmatar Hellequin Inc.	Posted - 2009.08.22 14:25:00 - [106] Edited by: The Djego on 22/08/2009 14:46:45 Well im 50/50 on the rig changes. Is it a good step as a base idea? In my opinion yes, the basic idea behind it is good(even if I feel diffrent about some points in it). I realy hope this will not end up like the time rigs got introduced. You had the feeling like pimping your ride and you finaly get a new layer of fitting and ability to make your ship more outstanding from unrigged ones, even if the pricetag limited it to BS and T2. As it is now on the common PVP BS fittings(or the poly for nano ships pre QR), you have actualy 3 slots that have to be fitted to, since next to any Ship you will encounter will have this to. You have tons of options how to rig a BS but in the end in 99% of the cases 45% more HP or 50% more repair is the way to go, not because it is better in any situation but you will most likely encounter the same boost in base EHP or tank on your target, so you basicly need them to stay on the same level. Even if the issue in the Cruiser\Frig class is not this big, I basicly see something like this comming here to. The reason this wasn¦t done mutch before was the price. Still a lot of Cruisers and BCs where rigged with cheaper options(falloff, optimal range, shield resist rigs, damage rigs etc) so you actualy had here the better choice what rig you want to use since the best ones where to expensive in general and you had to think a lot more about the price/gain ratio. Also 45% more Falloff looks a lot better if the other ships only have 10% more DPS or some other minor change down to beeing unrigged instead of 45% more EHP. If you actualy did spend a ton of ISK on it, you also got something out of it, since you could be shure you buying 45% more armor/shield instead of the need to increase your armor/shield by 45% to stay on the same level. Well we will see, since the market will play a serious role here to and if it will move in this direction there might be a resonable need for CCP to rethink rigs again, making them a bit more ballanced and pilotes realy able to make a individual choice instead of forcing them to one. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank! Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
DraconisAlpha	Posted - 2009.08.22 14:33:00 - [107] Originally by: z0de suck less? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH -_- (that means i'm not laughing) BTW, +30/40% or +20/30% means that you will have to kill +20/40% more ships to have a 1:1 ratio in isks. And a medium pvper gots a 1:1 ratio (or less more) in every fight (there are some with 2:1 and some with 1:2, some with 3:1 and some with 1:3...), it gots a 2:1 ratio? Ok, it is the same...you will never gain as much isks as you lose (I'm not talkin about 3:1 pvpers but about a medium pvper). This is the mechanic of the game...in games where items are not destroyed and there are no ship losses you can live doing pvp, but here you cannot. Any player I know, I had known and probably I will know, has an alt (miner, industrial...). Yeah, there is another choice...buy and sell game cards....or other less legal ways. I don't want to spend all my EUROS in isks but i will have to! Eve is an expansive game and it will always be more and more. I like pvp and ONLY pvp and I cannot play Eve without refilling my wallet, I have 10kk SP (I'm noob, yeah) and I'm condamned to lose every 1vs1. I don't like that.
Pater Peccavi Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2009.08.22 14:42:00 - [108] Originally by: DraconisAlpha I like pvp and ONLY pvp and I cannot play Eve without refilling my wallet, I have 10kk SP (I'm noob, yeah) and I'm condamned to lose every 1vs1. I don't like that. EVE is about risk vs. reward. In order to get the reward (PvP) you need to risk your items/isk. If you lose in PvP, you're supposed to feel it. Feeling it means you have to make isk to replace your loss. If you don't enjoy meaningful risk, EVE isn't the game for you. ______ Why has the number of players online dropped from 50k to 25k? BECAUSE OF SWINE FLU
DraconisAlpha	Posted - 2009.08.22 14:54:00 - [109] You seem not to understand that...I'm not talking about my pvp rate, I'm talking abount general pvp rate. Trying to explain: A is a pvp player B is a pvp player A=B as skillpoints, ships and fit (let's say a thorax) AvsB= 50%times A wins and 50%times B wins thorax value=6M, fit value=4M medium loss= (let's say) 6M+50%fit= 8M medium drop= 50%fit= 2M each fight there is a 10M loss and a 2M gain in 10 fights A will win 5 and B will win 5 A will lose 100M and gain 10M B is the same result=you cannot live with pvp with rigs... un-droppable cost will raise by (let's say) 5M in 10 fights A will lose 100M+50M=150M and gain 10M B is the same result=you cannot live with pvp and it is even harder. And you will have to rig your ship or in every 1vs1 fight you will lose it. Now, you have to consider fights against non-pvp players, but against them you gain nothing rigging frigates or cruisers, this is useful only against pvpers. Result: anyone will have to rig his ship and destroy-only items will only raise the cost of ships and not the value of dropped items.
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity	Posted - 2009.08.22 18:22:00 - [110] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 22/08/2009 18:26:00 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 22/08/2009 18:23:54 Originally by: DraconisAlpha You seem not to understand that...I'm not talking about my pvp rate, I'm talking abount general pvp rate. Trying to explain: A is a pvp player B is a pvp player A=B as skillpoints, ships and fit (let's say a thorax) AvsB= 50%times A wins and 50%times B wins thorax value=6M, fit value=4M medium loss= (let's say) 6M+50%fit= 8M medium drop= 50%fit= 2M each fight there is a 10M loss and a 2M gain It's obvious you're doing something wrong here, if you aim to profit. First off, you're not maximizing risk/reward. If you want to make money, either minimize risk (meaning; take on ships/players you believe you will kill* or at least are very certain you won't die to, in situations which are altogether favourable) or maximize profit (Ransom! Particularly the pod, if you can catch it) or both. *This includes 1v1 vs the same ship, too. Just be sure you've got the edge. Mind you, I don't do all that to the letter - when I want a good fight I'll go for ugly situations where I know it's probably not going to end well - and I participate in stuff like fleet ops which as a rule don't make money. Also, killing people who are not out to PVP (or better yet, ransoming them) is always a good money-maker. Btw, a lot of PVP is psychological in nature. You always want to be underestimated - you'll probably make better money in a maxed out Thrasher then you'll make in a all L4 + T2 gun Hurricane. Getting others to engage you believing they've got the edge is a art in itself anyway. Also: rigging being reasonably cheap for all T1 ships now makes it even more possible to "have the edge" the other side doesn't know about, because it makes for a larger number of possible fits, counterfits and such. Also: implants. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
DraconisAlpha	Posted - 2009.08.23 13:10:00 - [111] You are right. But I'm talkin of avarage. You want to be understimated, but so does the ship you fight with. You will never engage a ship that is stronger than yours, but so do other players. At the end of an year of engagements you will probably have lost (in pvp, vs pvpers) the same amount of ships you have killed if you are a normal player. If you are not and you are a good player there will be an opposite bad player that will always mantain the avarage rate 1:1. And here I'm talkin about pvpers. If you find a non pvper and you can kill him...that's good, but not so frequent. You can loot anything you want but small rigs will only kill pvpers wallets...that is because against a non pvper a rig is useless, you can beat him with or without rigs. They are useful only against pvpers. But...if I fit rigs, then you fit rigs and so does anyother player (pvper). If we all have a +20% armor it is useless. It is only a +30% ship cost increase.
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2009.08.23 13:29:00 - [112] Originally by: steveid the only problem I see is that BC should have BS sized rigs. If that is the case already then all good imo. Any reason on that? I mean they use cruiser-sized mods, so why battleship sized rigs?
Removal Tool Two Minutes Hate	Posted - 2009.08.23 17:42:00 - [113] I just undocked to find that PvP was indeed broken. Snapped right in two.
Lisento Slaven The Drekla Consortium	Posted - 2009.08.23 19:01:00 - [114] Here is what I see - leaving a rig slot open on frigates/cruisers would be as bad as using standard missiles and frig size railguns on a raven. I still see ravens using frig/cruiser railguns and standard missiles by the way. --- How to Fix Security Status
Dhaaka Vincatar	Posted - 2009.08.23 19:23:00 - [115] Edited by: Dhaaka Vincatar on 23/08/2009 19:25:28 Originally by: Sidus Isaacs I fail to see a problem. We will see cheaper ships, and more rigged T1 ships. This is a boost to solo PVP if anything as one can afford to loose shisp more often. Saying enything else is thoughtless. In short: No big effects, at all. Other the somewhat vhepaer ships overall. So maby we will see more PvP (this is a good thing btw)? Originally I thought this patch would be a great idea....but it actually makes it harder for me to afford a viable pvp ship. Before, rigging your T1 frig was ridiculously cost-prohibitive, so people stuck to T2 guns and meta modules. However, now (or soon, rather) it will be much more affordable....but will still quadruple the price of the ship. You will have to spend 4 million or so to rig your Punisher or whatever properly... Currently equipping my Tristan with just T2 guns and T1 or meta 1-2 everything else costs about 1.5 million or so including T2 ammo, very likely more. Now I will have to spend 4-5 million on my T1 ship just to try to be competitive. Meanwhile those who can afford and have the capability to fly T2 ships regularily can rig them for cheaper (which they were doing anyways), so they will be flown more often. Obviously 4-5 million is not a big deal for most of you. But I only make 1-2 million every night by doing level 2 missions. I do these in a frigate because that's all I can fly, and most likely anyone who can fly T1 frigates only can only do level 1s....and they will be much worse off then me. So, do we have to mission for days at a time in order to fly 1 competitive T1 frigate that can still be killed in seconds by most anything? Or do we have to get a Battleship and farm level 4 missions in order to support T1 frigate pvp? I realize I could do level 2 missions faster in a Caracal, but why do you have to support frigate pvp with cruiser-level missions (or, if you're going to go to cruiser, why not BC or BS as well). Basically, this makes things much better for those already able to afford rigs, as they can now do it for cheaper, and it also makes it good for the segment of people that could not afford to fly rigged ships before but can now. It makes things much worse for those of us that cannot afford to fly rigged ships still. I suppose that is a minority of the population, so overall I'd say the patch would be a success, but still....
Isareal Altara	Posted - 2009.08.23 20:43:00 - [116] reads to me like the op is saying they went out of their way to make eve more dangerous for folks... and is not ****ed that eve is more dangerous for them with the cost of outfitting ships with rigs has gone done allowing for more potent prey that might be able to bite back (or turtle long enough for support to arrive) Sounds like ya might run into q-ships out there now
Cpt Branko Beyond Divinity Inc Beyond Virginity	Posted - 2009.08.23 21:05:00 - [117] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 23/08/2009 21:15:57 Edited by: Cpt Branko on 23/08/2009 21:12:12 Originally by: DraconisAlpha You are right. But I'm talkin of avarage. You want to be understimated, but so does the ship you fight with. You will never engage a ship that is stronger than yours, but so do other players. That's what I'm talking about - they think they're engaging a weaker ship. Affordable rigging is going to make it even more fun in this respect. Originally by: DraconisAlpha that is because against a non pvper a rig is useless, you can beat him with or without rigs. They are useful only against pvpers. So untrue. A non-PVP fit ship has at least one midslot more; because he doesn't need that point. And I've engaged bigger ships (eg. Wolf, pre-QR, vs Raven/Drake/Ferox) flown by non-PVPers, where I wouldn't have succeeded without rigs at all. Originally by: Dhaaka Vincatar Edited by: Dhaaka Vincatar on 23/08/2009 19:25:28 Originally by: Sidus Isaacs I fail to see a problem. We will see cheaper ships, and more rigged T1 ships. This is a boost to solo PVP if anything as one can afford to loose shisp more often. Saying enything else is thoughtless. In short: No big effects, at all. Other the somewhat vhepaer ships overall. So maby we will see more PvP (this is a good thing btw)? Originally I thought this patch would be a great idea....but it actually makes it harder for me to afford a viable pvp ship. Before, rigging your T1 frig was ridiculously cost-prohibitive, so people stuck to T2 guns and meta modules. However, now (or soon, rather) it will be much more affordable....but will still quadruple the price of the ship. You will have to spend 4 million or so to rig your Punisher or whatever properly... Currently equipping my Tristan with just T2 guns and T1 or meta 1-2 everything else costs about 1.5 million or so including T2 ammo, very likely more. Now I will have to spend 4-5 million on my T1 ship just to try to be competitive. You've overdoing it. Anyway, to properly rig a Rifter costs, with my horrible industry skills and unresearched BPO (I'm sure rigs will be cheaper then they are for me to build once prices stabilize) costs ~500K ISK, give or take 200K. That's far from expensive. If you're buying em off the market as prices are you're just being daft, given you can save at least ~3.5M per rig just buying the materials, the industry 1 skillbook, and the BPO. Also, if you want something funny: I already faced the rigged Punisher in my unrigged Rifter when rigs were not affordable. Result was, of course, a 70M (actually, more like 85M at the time, given he was using "Refuge" Adaptive Nano Platings) lossmail for the Punisher pilot. Rigs are not automatic win. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
McClan Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2009.08.23 21:16:00 - [118] This is way we need 3 rig slots on t2 ships to make then worth it
tiviirulez	Posted - 2009.08.27 07:00:00 - [119] Drake online Who came up with that stupid rigging in the first place, accounting?
steveid Viziam	Posted - 2009.08.30 11:25:00 - [120] Originally by: Irida Mershkov Originally by: steveid the only problem I see is that BC should have BS sized rigs. If that is the case already then all good imo. Any reason on that? I mean they use cruiser-sized mods, so why battleship sized rigs? My reasoning is not based upon t1 rigs which are not a problem but t2 rigs. You are essentially adding another 20% onto passive tanks on battlecruisers which are already very decent on most races ships. Where previously a t2 rig fit would cost you 600 mil now it will cost you 120 which is of course more than worth it. As an example some passive tanked battlecruisers, not overheated, no implants t2 gear and rigs: Drake 1200 dps Harbinger 855 dps Myrmidon 1150 dps Hurricane 932 dps now I'd probably agree with you if you stated that this is a problem with passive tanks and not with BS / BC sized t2 rigs as you can doing this get an Ishtar to 818 dps tanked but I think the issue I stated exasperates it.
techzer0 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.08.30 11:36:00 - [121] Originally by: steveid Originally by: Irida Mershkov Originally by: steveid the only problem I see is that BC should have BS sized rigs. If that is the case already then all good imo. Any reason on that? I mean they use cruiser-sized mods, so why battleship sized rigs? My reasoning is not based upon t1 rigs which are not a problem but t2 rigs. You are essentially adding another 20% onto passive tanks on battlecruisers which are already very decent on most races ships. Where previously a t2 rig fit would cost you 600 mil now it will cost you 120 which is of course more than worth it. As an example some passive tanked battlecruisers, not overheated, no implants t2 gear and rigs: Drake 1200 dps Harbinger 855 dps Myrmidon 1150 dps Hurricane 932 dps now I'd probably agree with you if you stated that this is a problem with passive tanks and not with BS / BC sized t2 rigs as you can doing this get an Ishtar to 818 dps tanked but I think the issue I stated exasperates it. Who fits for 100% tank? Bait ships and mission runners, thats it. PVP Ships fit damage mods, scrams, mwds... show me setups with those included that tank that much DPS. Lets make it 2x damage mods per ship, since I wouldn't want to make you try fitting 3 because that might blow your mind ------------ Originally by: Nexus Kinnon I could outgay you even without my pink tutu. >.>
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2009.08.30 11:44:00 - [122] Originally by: steveid As an example some passive tanked battlecruisers, not overheated, no implants t2 gear and rigs: Drake 1200 dps Harbinger 855 dps Myrmidon 1150 dps Hurricane 932 dps now I'd probably agree with you if you stated that this is a problem with passive tanks What is this drivel? Nobody with a clue uses a passive tank, nobody with a clue fits SPRs, a ship fitted in that fashion is 100% useless. Your DPS-tanked numbers are classic EFT bull****, of no meaning or consequence for actual Eve reality.
Roemy Schneider Vanishing Point.	Posted - 2009.08.30 12:10:00 - [123] guardian just got 10% more ridiculous [Guardian, 1600 AB] 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Internal Force Field Array I Adaptive Nano Plating II Thermic Plating II Reactor Control Unit II Y-S8 Hydrocarbon I Afterburners Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I Large Remote Armor Repair System II Large Remote Armor Repair System II Large Remote Armor Repair System II Large Remote Armor Repair System II Large Remote Armor Repair System II Large 'Regard' I Power Projector Ancillary Current Router I Ancillary Current Router I beats 800mm plate + trimarks those energy grid rigs need a drawback, pronto... or boost the scimitar's power grid and i'll quit yappin' - putting the gist back into logistics
Lemmy Kravitz	Posted - 2009.08.30 14:26:00 - [124] Originally by: Removal Tool If the small rigs are cheap enough, Destroyers will rival Assault Ships, Ishkur will still be the best AF, and the good T1 cruisers will be even better (Rupter!) And I guess T2 cruiser hulls will be cheaper to fit. Same for BC/CS if they use Med sized rigs as I expect. Hopefully more noobs will feel capable of pvp. I've been waiting for this day. I rigged out a dessie one time just for giggles and it omgwtfpwn'd a couple of AF's. But at the same time I don't think the AF's were rigged. Either way, it's a good day to be a dessi pilot, people will be afraid... very afraid.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one 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.