Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Saikron
NME1
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 05:17:00 -
[121] - Quote
Dondoran wrote:CCP come on T2 gang links thats just to much 35.2% bonus from a tech3 WIN FIX off grid boosting its the right thing to do remember fleet command ships
Here is an obvious problem that will probably never get fixed, lol. |
keuel
Crimoria Co Vera Cruz Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 06:27:00 -
[122] - Quote
T2 Siege is fine... T2 triage neds a buff: perpahps from 100 to 120% on rep ammount? and less time on cycles? so it can be err...worth?
|
Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe Transmission Lost
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 07:14:00 -
[123] - Quote
First off: the t2 siege module, please understand the math before saying its only a 6.66% scan res bonus. Say you have 100 scan resolution and go siege with a t1 siege module. That leaves you at 25 scan res. Go siege with a t2, you end up with 30. And what percentage increase is that? 20%, not 6.66%.
As far as triage t2 is concerned, adding a cap recharge bonus to t2 triage modules would severely jack up WH space carriers. In systems with either high cap recharge bonus (pulsars) or high resists (wulf-rayets), making their tank even stiffer is just a bad move. Most of the serious WH roaming gangs carry 1-2 (sometimes 3) bhaalgorns for neuts, and dmg comes from t3s which isnt exactly the best. Certain WH fights go on for hours just because of a carrier's impact (see failheap challenge), and buffing them more would just be a bad move. Maybe offer decreased cap usage for remote reps instead?
As far as t3 ganglink bonuses: they really need to be readjusted to give only a slight increase and not a massive one like the t2 changes are showing. Its not uncommon to find tengus, lokis, etc sitting in a pos with 6 warfare links running. HOWEVER, you must remember that you need warfare link specialist to 5 to use the command processors, something command ships don't need to run their 3. |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
45
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 09:34:00 -
[124] - Quote
What about instead of the T2 triage module giving a cap recharge bonus, it gives a discount to remote repair/energy transfer? maybe 10-15% to let us do our job better without making our tank any stiffer because, lets face it, our tank is already pretty good.
Also, you forgot to add in T2 cyno generators . . . maybe a shorter cycle time and less fuel usage? just something to think about. |
James Bryant
Dark Shadow Industries. Fidelas Constans
3
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 13:56:00 -
[125] - Quote
Anyone take a look at the T2 bubble yet? I saw it last night, but I didn't have the skills to fit it and try it out on my Onyx. |
Yahrr
The Tuskers
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 14:23:00 -
[126] - Quote
Willl Adama wrote:Leave offgrid T3 command cruisers alone, it'll be bad news for many small roaming gangs if they have to bring ongrid commandships. No, it would bring back the Eve experience like it was a few years time ago. Going solo != going solo with a boosting alt. If they really need to stay offgrid to keep you happy, then at least make them appear on killmails. |
Alsyth
Night Warder
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 16:19:00 -
[127] - Quote
Yahrr wrote:Willl Adama wrote:Leave offgrid T3 command cruisers alone, it'll be bad news for many small roaming gangs if they have to bring ongrid commandships. No, it would bring back the Eve experience like it was a few years time ago. Going solo != going solo with a boosting alt. If they really need to stay offgrid to keep you happy, then at least make them appear on killmails.
+1 to Yahrr.
Offgrid boosters help locals, not roamers, who have to bring a ship anyway. Doesn't matter to them that much if it's a cloaked nullified T3 or a real CS. |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 23:27:00 -
[128] - Quote
replying to the topic: The drone upgrades are very good, but their cpu consumption makes them near-unfittable on ishtar. Drone link augmentor is fine, but the omnidirectional track. link should have it's cpu lowered. Also, their requirements are very high, consider lowering it for things like the navigation computer? they are rarely used and do not provide a massive boost anyway. Omnidirectional tracking link is quite powerfull in it;s t2 iteration, but can we really not have it as an active module that can be scripted? for greater flexibility? |
Tanex Gulder
Scarab Technological Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 12:02:00 -
[129] - Quote
Cmon CCP 0.5% command bonus for across the board for T2 Gang Assist Modules.
This should be looked at as the base command bonus of T1 modules varies from 2% to 4.5% and the T2 bonus needs to reflect 25% increaase across the board.
Also inventong the T2 Modules will be very expensive as BPC copy time is over 4 hours per single copy. This will make it only practical to invent single run T2 copies and will make them expensive.
As an example you get less than a 1km range increase using the T2 Mining Laaser Field Enhancemnet Module which is pretty poor, so will it be worth the invention cost?
These issues applies to : Information Warfare Link - Sensor Integrity base Bonus of 3% Mining Foreman Link - Mining Laser Field Enhancement base Bonus of 4.5% Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Manuvers.
CCP Please readdress these issues.
|
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 19:31:00 -
[130] - Quote
most of the time energy is the number one concern of a triage pilot. the rep bonus would be nice but unnecessary. anything makes it easier to fit tank or increase cap ammount and reduce the ammount of slots dedicated to pure cap recharge is fine by me. |
|
Mitsu Blutz
V0LTA VOLTA Corp
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.16 22:44:00 -
[131] - Quote
I can't read nothing about Interdiction Sphere Launcher II ? |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
366
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 04:41:00 -
[132] - Quote
Copy times on the T2 command link modules (all 15 of them) have been set to 1 minute per copy. That's very much on the low side when compared to other modules of the same cost tier.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=292244#post292244
They should have been set to something in the 3-8 minute range for a single copy. The Small Tractor Beam I BPO has a copy time of 2 minutes.
Bomb launcher and Warp disruption should probably also have a 2-3 minute copy time. And the copy times on the drone modules and hull repair modules look a bit low. The 1 minute timer is probably fine for the small hull repper, but the med/large should have slightly longer copy times (2 and 3 minutes). |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 06:10:00 -
[133] - Quote
what about a range bonus to the T2 triage module, so our RR goes farther . . . It just seems odd that logistics cruisers can project their remote rep farther than a triage carrier. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 07:06:00 -
[134] - Quote
the two platforms are intended to fight in two completely different scenarios. carriers rely on being the focal point on the battle field and logistics ships fly on the out skirts of a fight.
triage carriers create bubbles of control on a battlefield. if you extend their range they become overpowered |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
46
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 07:17:00 -
[135] - Quote
and giving it extra cap wouldnt make them overpowered? I think that would be worse than making their sphere of influence larger . . . |
Raven Ether
Republic University Minmatar Republic
31
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 10:50:00 -
[136] - Quote
Bomb Launcher is underwhelming, maybe extra capacity for one more bomb and skill requirement to lvl 4? |
Helothane
Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore
18
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 15:58:00 -
[137] - Quote
The small, medium and large t2 remote hull repair systems all require Remote Hull Repair Systems V. That seems odd, at the very least, and breaks from the pattern for t2 remote armor, shield and cap transfer mods. Why not levels III, IV and IV, respectively? |
Kigar
SOERI Academy Ultima Rati0
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 16:07:00 -
[138] - Quote
Bomb Launcher II is underpowered. I think it must have AoE bonus. Or may be +x% bomb speed and -x% explosion timer ( for same flying distance as cuttent ) |
Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations 0ccupational Hazzard
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 17:04:00 -
[139] - Quote
Dondoran wrote:FIX off grid boosting its the right thing to do
Yep fix that,and we all can live with T2 links then. Reminder : risk vs. reward |
Charles Edisson
Isk Incorporated
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 16:23:00 -
[140] - Quote
Raven Ether wrote:Bomb Launcher is underwhelming, maybe extra capacity for one more bomb and skill requirement to lvl 4?
Bomb launcher is if anything overpowered. Considering the second most expensive/powerful ship in the game now only has one flight of Bombers/Fighters and one bombing run will kill them all. bombs are too powerfull as it is already. Actually I guess it's not the launcher that's overpowered but the bombs them selves. |
|
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
26
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 21:09:00 -
[141] - Quote
Sigras wrote:and giving it extra cap wouldnt make them overpowered? I think that would be worse than making their sphere of influence larger . . .
This is an interesting point, but I'd rather go up against a ship that can rep a LOT within an area I can get out of (relying on my ability to dictate range) than a ship that can rep a large amount within a huge area I'm going to have more trouble avoiding.
|
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
49
|
Posted - 2011.11.18 23:12:00 -
[142] - Quote
one bombing run will only kill them all if theyre lucky enough to catch them all traveling between targets . . . when they're not MWDing theyre actually quite small. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 04:35:00 -
[143] - Quote
57km radius is a huge volume of space covered by massive reps as it is. decreasing the cap use of RR's in triage would be a significant increase in capability but, it would not be overpowered. the gangs backed up by triage are still fairly limited in their offensive capacity because that rep radius is not changing but once every 6-7 minutes or so ( i say 6-7 minutes because at best a carrier could go in and out of triage in 5 and with webs be moved about the field via warp ins) the gang backed up by logi's however can move around a much larger area on grid and rep a larger area on said grid and never have to worry about moving out of rep range (assuming the logis and dps dealers arent derp)
that being said. range would give the group too many possibilities offensively while cap would simply allow for longer straight up brawl. a couple of dreads or enough sub caps are still going to overwhelm the local tank |
Lek Arthie
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 05:21:00 -
[144] - Quote
I think a little more bonus for T2 gang links would be nice. Training max leadership is not easy. Maybe 3% instead of 2,5%. Atm its just a 5% difference from the T1 module... Not that much. T2 siege module gets 20% bonus damage... For example speed boosting a vaga with T1 module max skills brings it to around around 3600m/s, with T2 it goes around 3800m/s... |
Crucis Cassiopeiae
EvE-COM
724
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 14:02:00 -
[145] - Quote
Tanex Gulder wrote:Cmon CCP an increase of 0.5% command bonus for across the board for T2 Gang Assist Modules.
This should be looked at as the base command bonus of T1 gang modules varies from 2% to 4.5% and the T2 bonus needs to reflect 25% increaase across the board.
Also inventong the T2 Modules will be very expensive as BPC copy time is over 4 hours per single copy. This will make it only practical to invent single run T2 copies and will make them expensive.
As an example you get less than a 1km range increase using the T2 Mining Laaser Field Enhancemnet Module which is pretty poor, so will it be worth the invention cost?
These issues applies to : Information Warfare Link - Sensor Integrity base Bonus of 3% Mining Foreman Link - Mining Laser Field Enhancement base Bonus of 4.5% Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Manuvers base bonus of 3%
CCP Please readdress these issues.
yea... give a little love to miners here at least... please...
|
Avila Cracko
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
115
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 16:49:00 -
[146] - Quote
Crucis Cassiopeiae wrote:Tanex Gulder wrote:Cmon CCP an increase of 0.5% command bonus for across the board for T2 Gang Assist Modules.
This should be looked at as the base command bonus of T1 gang modules varies from 2% to 4.5% and the T2 bonus needs to reflect 25% increaase across the board.
Also inventong the T2 Modules will be very expensive as BPC copy time is over 4 hours per single copy. This will make it only practical to invent single run T2 copies and will make them expensive.
As an example you get less than a 1km range increase using the T2 Mining Laaser Field Enhancemnet Module which is pretty poor, so will it be worth the invention cost?
These issues applies to : Information Warfare Link - Sensor Integrity base Bonus of 3% Mining Foreman Link - Mining Laser Field Enhancement base Bonus of 4.5% Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Manuvers base bonus of 3%
CCP Please readdress these issues. yea... give a little love to miners here at least... please... Boost T2 gang links for miners...
Yea... fix this please...
and give a little love to miners... |
Lek Arthie
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 18:01:00 -
[147] - Quote
Not only mining links, have a look at all links... give some more love for T2 links. Not asking for imbalanced things, just a little bit so you can feel that you are getting T2 link boosts instead of T1. For example, vaga with T1 speed link, reaches ~3600m/s from ~2900m/s, a 700m/s inrease, it would nice if T2 module added another 400m/s, or maybe 350m/s.
Quote:decreasing the cap use of RR's in triage would be a significant increase in capability but, it would not be overpowered.
Point is that T2 modules improve T1 versions. Adding cap reduction to T2 triage is something that the T1 doesn't offer, it contradicts with the whole T2 approach. It will make an entirely different module. Even if that is done, there should be caution not to become cap stable. RRing in triage should still be cap hungry and you should still have to watch out. Well you can make triage stable even today but that cripples the ship a little. Btw cap reduction is almost exactly the same as giving rep amount bonus. Having the ability to rep more for less cap, means more reps. Short-term you might not notice difference, but long-term it does make a huge difference. And will also make the carrier way harder to kill as it can run its local reps more, maybe even fit 3 instead of 2. If its underpowered atm it should be fixed, but not make it overpowered... (like SCs). On a side note they can reduce cycle time and fuel reqs for T2 triage, and thats something that wont make it overpowered but also make triage more flexible in its use. Range bonus is also a possibility, 57km is not enough in every fight. Not every fight is done by blobing around the carrier. Some fights, especially big ones, are done moving and a stationary carrier will become obsolete soon. Increasing your effective range is not bad. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 20:42:00 -
[148] - Quote
you contradict yourself. you say t2 is supposed to merely improve upon t1 yet, you still want a range bonus added to a t2 module that does not exist on its t1 counterpart.
that little tidbit aside, we use these ships in triage mode almost daily and if the range was increased, it would be a very bad thing for everyone else in wormhole space against us. we could warp our carrier in at 100 and have mid range vessels with factions points holding you down 70km from that carrier andyou wouldnt be able to do a damn thing about it.
as funny as that sounds. it would get boring very very quickly because it would be very OP.
i dont have a problem with t2 modules having a bonus that t1 does not but rep range is not the answer.
also, most triage carriers used in brawls are being used in wormhole space and i can tell you that most of them are being used in a cap stable form. so, more cap stability is not analogous to rep ammount, we are all already repping the max ammount possible all the time (until the baahlgorns get there)
I respect what you are trying to say but, the practical knowledge AHARM has accumulated on the subject is probably close to the most comprehensive in EvE. Also, if you can figure out how to scrounge up the fitting for the 3rd local you mention for an archon or any other armor carrier, let us know. |
Svennig
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 21:07:00 -
[149] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:you contradict yourself. you say t2 is supposed to merely improve upon t1 yet, you still want a range also, most triage carriers used in brawls are being used in wormhole space and i can tell you that most of them are being used in a cap stable form. so, more cap stability is not analogous to rep ammount, we are all already repping the max ammount possible all the time (until the baahlgorns get there)
Well, it's not surprising that you're cap stable when you're spending this much on fits:
[Archon, Robert Hudson's Archon] Capital Inefficient Armor Repair Unit Capital Inefficient Armor Repair Unit Centum A-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Tairei's Modified Capacitor Power Relay Tairei's Modified Capacitor Power Relay Tairei's Modified Capacitor Power Relay Tairei's Modified Capacitor Power Relay
True Sansha Cap Recharger True Sansha Cap Recharger True Sansha Cap Recharger True Sansha Cap Recharger
Capital Murky Energy Transmitter I Capital Coaxial Regenerative Projector Capital Coaxial Regenerative Projector Capital Coaxial Regenerative Projector Triage Module I
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Large Capacitor Control Circuit II Large Capacitor Control Circuit II
+ (presumably, as it's not stable without them as you claim) strong mindflood, cc4+, cr4+.
The T2 triage with cap usage bonus would allow you to get closer to cap stability on T2 fits, or cap-stable on much much much cheaper fits. Fuckit, you could take the fit above and swap a Tairei's for another A-Type EANM, which will give another ~10% boost to all resists. Sure, it's not a third repper, but good luck with that. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 21:22:00 -
[150] - Quote
yeah, our average fit is about 12 bil cheaper and still stable. that was our ceo's pimp fit one. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |