My reply got eaten, here goes again.

T2 triage mod is still underwhelming (as mentioned on the CSM forums...). It needs to either boost local reps or remote rep range, plus it should be 2 more targets than T1. Another option would be less cap use on local/remote reps.

The probe launcher will make sister launchers useless - maybe give it a slightly lower bonus than Sister ones?

whats the cpu requirement on the omnidirectional tracking link II

As I'm currently copying siege module blueprints:

You *probably* want to look at the copy times for some of these modules :-)

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

The only advantage of the Sisters Core Proble Launcher compared to the T2 is less CPU Requirement, would be nice if there would be something else that sets them appart since CPU is seldom a Consideration when fitting Ships for probing.

It's 39 cpu the same as the what the fed navy version is on tq, however currently on sis the fed navy is now at 36 cpu

With such low fitting requirements and the same pre-reqs as the tech 1 version this will make the fed navy version worthless.
This needs to be changed. A tech 2 mod should not have the same skill requirements as a tech 1 mod.

I would suggest at the least that it should require drone sharpshooting 5 and possibly sentry 5. Otherwise there is no reason to ever fit the fed navy version except for slightly lower cpu, which really would only be for the ishtar since the domi has plenty of cpu for sentry fits anyways.

Agreed. Tech III command subsystem stepped all over command ships. Possibly the increased cpu requirements of tech II links will negate some of the tech III faggotry, but probably not enough of a fitting cost to prevent the tech III idiocy. Tech III should not do command, hac, recon, etc better than tech II. You really ****** this up.

Make links only work on-grid and that will restore command ships to their rightful place at the top of providing buffs.

erm... Just wanted to ask something... Are you saying that a TWENTY PERCENT damage boost is nothing? You do realize that most increments in eve are for 5% or 3% damage per skill level? here with just one more skill level you basically gain what other skills need 4 levels to achieve. 20% damage boost is HUGE. And it's not only that, since there are the locked targets bonus AND the resolution bonus. While the resolution bonus by itself may be small enough to be barely noticeable, it's on top of the other changes and believe me, on ANY ship, if there was a module that could grant a 20% increase in damage, everybody would be fitting it.

because 5-8 days training for L4 is an acceptable training time for 20% more damage and alliances will make dread pilots go for it, 32-40 is not.

Nope. For a highly advanced T2 Module like the Siege Module, 30 days are a reasonable amount of time.
You have to consider that we are talking about a capital ship, not a simple battleship or battlecruiser.
Capitals are, or should be (Ratting carriers go to hell!), not used for your daily activities, but are designed for very specific tasks.
And the task of a dreadnought is to kill big things quick. While the tank of a dread seems impressive at first glance, one must consider that most of their targets pack enough punch to break this tank without too much problem. That considered, a tanking bonus would be quite useless, as it would just delay the dead of the dread for a few seconds. A tracking bonus would be great, of course (and the Phoenix would absolutely love [and needs] a reduced explosion velocity), but it could easily break the balance of the dreads, more than any other possible bonus.

(...)

T2 triage is absolutely worthless. A immobile ship with about 180km locking range und 52km rr-range does not need 20% more target range.

3 - none at all -> because you are in a cap fleet, your dps is a drop of water in a full cup, second you are in siege, so its 5 minutes you are stuck putting damage in the target. Individually putting more 20% and the fleet killing a target 2 seconds before the normal expected time will make no difference because you have to wait the 5m to end!

Tech III should not do command, hac, recon, etc better than tech II. You really ****** this up.

VERY much like the new gang links! Don't have a command ship yet to test them on but singles on the BC's work nicely. Interdiction Maneuvers! Hell yes!

Stop complaining about off grid boosts. Just use some tactics and scan the ship down. He can't keep them on on in warp either so its totally easy to counter off gird boosters.

Not so easy when they sit behind a POS shield and a bit harder to push out of shield with another ship.

Also, there are (unless they changed it recently) unscannable T3 command fits, that can be place in a safespot anywhere and will provide a fleet with bonuses without any fear of retaliation whatsoever.

The t2 bomb launcher is kinda useless, bombers are incredibly tough fits as it is, the extra cpu needed nigh ensures it will never be used for a mere delay reduction. Most bombers only fire one as it is before warping off.

Now, if there were T2 bombs that did more damage or had a higher range, that would make the modules have some value.

Joinin the call, T2 triage is worthless as it stands.

Make the bonus something useful: they can rep sieged dreads. That would shake the capital game up a bit.

can you add a little bit more boost to T2 Links??? please???
because now its the lowest gain T2 thing you are putting in...

Because %gain parity is equivalent to balance amirite?

We need 22-24km scrams after links. 19-20km is not sufficient.

t2 links seem fine

leave the damn command t3's alone there 3x the cost, and no where near the ehp when fit for more than 1 link.... command ships have their purposes so do t3 command ships....

Please say CCP Devs are listening to the failness of t2 triage.... how about give it a cap bonus when in siege that would be nice or something useful range <> useful

Can somone confirm my math on the t2 link changes (don't have max skill booster alt to test with yet)

Max skill loki now gives 35% boost with Rapid Deployment
Max skill loki now gives 49% boost with Interdiction

Cheers.

On the subject of warfare links and the ship bonus, as some people have mention the Tech 3's are out of line. I beleive that the Tech 3's are designed to be highly flexible vessels but not quite as good as the specialised Tech 2 version of their various roles, ie the Tech 3 recon/EW sections are not as powerful as the Tech 2 recon ships and the Tech 3 logistic's sections are not as good as the Tech 2 logistic hulls.

Only in the command Ship role is the Tech 3 better than the Tech 2 versions, so for an easy fix why not simply swap the two bonus(es) around so using the Vulture and Tengu as examples

The Vulture gets the 5% to effectiveness of siege warfare links
and
The Tengu gets the 3% to effectiveness of siege warfare links

This would put the warfare link Tech 3's back into their place as "better than Tech 1" but "not quite as good as Tech 2"

First I want to report a bug, my weapons where grouped but I got the damage report in the monitor of only one gun:

I think the offgrid/possed command boosts are in need of fixing as well, it shouldn't be a valid tactic to sit in a pos and help a fleet. The idea is to command, i.e. be a part of the fleet. Not sit in a hidey hole while helping out your side like some middle eastern dictator.

Like/Approve

In what way should a command ship be less viable than a t3 which is designed to be flexible. The cruisers should be good at a lot of things, but excel at nothing, especially when comparing to ships that specialize.

I think the offgrid/possed command boosts are in need of fixing as well, it shouldn't be a valid tactic to sit in a pos and help a fleet. The idea is to command, i.e. be a part of the fleet. Not sit in a hidey hole while helping out your side like some middle eastern dictator.

something you forget is that fleet commandships actually *can* be on the field with 3 gang links, while t3s with 3 ganglinks are paperthin. if you want to have ongrid t3 boosting you can only have 1 gang link per t3 ship. have fun with that in bigger fleets. imho that still makes fleet commandships superior to t3.

I think your fix here is off grid boosting . . . if the only way to get a boost was to bring the ship on grid, the T3s literally would be limited to one mod w/o gimping their fit. This would fit the different but not better than T2 profile.

As will said ... you mainly nerf small/"solo" pvp with that. checkout his videos e.g.

Forcing T3 links to be on grid would not just make them inferior to CS, it would make them completely useless... They will die every second fight -> lose skill points -> no one will use them.

Boost command bonus for CS and nerf it for T3.

First : forums are dumb, they keep unlogging me and I have to rewrite my posts, I hate that. CCP, you could do better, every basic forum has a way to prevent that.



Will Adama, as much as I like your, and your alliance mates' videos, I just don't consider pvp with ganglinked alt solo PVP.



And for ganglinked T3, it seems like you never flew them (or a field CS) except in gimped full ganglinks fits.


For instance, a cloaky 100k EHP Loki with 1 disruptor and 3 webs, all of them reaching 50km is not useless for my fleets. Yet it's totally different from a Claymore.

Besides, you can eject and not lose a skill.

and you would really fly that in 1-2 vs 5+ situations? without any logistics on the field?

how exactly does making command ships need to be on grid hurt roamers more than locals? As a local I can no longer have all 4 bonuses active from two ships sitting in a POS, they now need to be on grid, whereas if a roamer wants to bring along a command ship, its going to jump the gate with the rest of the fleet anyway . . .

Think about it objectively, if all boosting ships needed to be on grid, then you would really have a fair balance between T3 and command ships

I don't know how someone could honestly think that off grid booster help roamers (having to bring these ships through every system when you roam ? Be attentive to them because they could get probed in their safespot by a local prober, no bonus when the booster warp....) more than locals with 2 T3s (or a T3 and a CS) at a POS as FC/WC.

What about having offgrid boosting being half as effective, while on grid gives the full bonuses?

This is just plain stupid.

I don't like that the T2 Modules have the same primary stats as faction modules. Examples are Probe Launchers and Omni. Tracking Link- Drone Upgrades.

Please nerf the T2 stats a bit or boost the stats of faction modules.

As on subject of a T3 on a POS - people, please! You came to their home, they live there, it's kind'a their territory. They will and should have advantages when they defend their system! You do the same for your home, aren't you?[/b]

They already have :
- a POS to hide in where we can't go because of guns
- the possibility to reship at station each time they lose a ship
- the possibility to reship and fly the perfect counter to us, be it capital remote if you want
- safespots everywhere it matters
- cloaked alts on gates and nearby systems to know where we are immediatly, and choose their ships accordingly
- usually they have alts ready to probe us with perfect skills/ship in no time


It's more than enough.


We roamers, on the other side :
- don't have any POSes to hide in
- can't reship at all when we lose a ship, or when we'd like to change ships because of our opponents
- don't have that much safespots in systems we don't roam often (sometimes no safespots at all)
- usually in small roaming gangs (5-20) we don't have enough scouts to have a vision on -every- nearby system
- when we have a prober (not always the case) his job is more difficult than it is for locals, and if he wants to be useful in the fight, he won't have a Virtued Covops.

T2 Triage module is quite useless, compared to its T1 version. Prolly it should receive 5 to 10% rep/remote rep bonuses?

You are, well, roaming. If you find that system inhabitants have fortified their position - move over or risk taking them on. Roaming, as I envision it, takes targets of opportunity or makes hit & run moves.
If you think like that - than when your roaming enters the system the game has to remove all POS, stations, ganglink bonuses and so on. WAKE UP!. You are:
1. In hostile space
2. Friends of the inhabitants probably live near by anyway.
3. It's their territory - they have intel and scouts any way.
4. So, they have a pos or station with ships ready - what a surprise for you!

Dammit, I read this ganglink bonus whine and one thing comes to mind: a bunch of space whines who want to PvP on their own terms when they go to hostile space. I have an impression that if it was possible, you would make that when you enter system - stations deny docking to everyone and POS'es bump all pilots out of their force fields.

You are roamers, you chose to have a light, agile and fast gang - use it. Hit fast and go your way. If you want a good battle - bring battleships for gods sake and not that nano-gay-style-fleet that can't break a gang that has a bonus giving ship in the system.

You are, well, roaming. If you find that system inhabitants have fortified their position - move over or risk taking them on. Roaming, as I envision it, takes targets of opportunity or makes hit & run moves.
If you think like that - than when your roaming enters the system the game has to remove all POS, stations, ganglink bonuses and so on. WAKE UP!. You are:
1. In hostile space
2. Friends of the inhabitants probably live near by anyway.
3. It's their territory - they have intel and scouts any way.
4. So, they have a pos or station with ships ready - what a surprise for you!

Dammit, I read this ganglink bonus whine and one thing comes to mind: a bunch of space whines who want to PvP on their own terms when they go to hostile space. I have an impression that if it was possible, you would make that when you enter system - stations deny docking to everyone and POS'es bump all pilots out of their force fields.

You are roamers, you chose to have a light, agile and fast gang - use it. Hit fast and go your way. If you want a good battle - bring battleships for gods sake and not that nano-gay-style-fleet that can't break a gang that has a bonus giving ship in the system.

restricting command links to ongrid would just be plain ******** and render T3 command ships entirely useless. Switching t3 commad bonusses with the CS bonusse so the CS have an advantage there would be okay though

more unqualified statements . . .

why would T3 command ships not be used to provide bonuses if command links were restricted to on grid? theyre smaller, faster, provide a better bonus, can be used to do other things in addition to provide bonuses, and can have just as stiff a tank.

It would just be deciding if you want one really good bonus or 3 pretty good bonuses

more unqualified statements . . .

why would T3 command ships not be used to provide bonuses if command links were restricted to on grid? theyre smaller, faster, provide a better bonus, can be used to do other things in addition to provide bonuses, and can have just as stiff a tank.

It would just be deciding if you want one really good bonus or 3 pretty good bonuses

You just don't get it, do you.

Cloaky bonus lokis are used so they don't need to be commited to a 10vs50.
You're talking about things you don't know anything about. How many SP do you have in leadership? Does anyone in your alliance even fly mindlinked commandships/T3s? I bet no.

A triple link loki is unable to fit any sort of tank. It goes maybe the speed of a dual nano hurricane, has worse agility and costs 450m + 100m in implants. They have pretty much the same sig as a Cane, too. They'll just get one/twovolleyed by any artillery BS.

No one needs only one bonus. The skirmish bonuses are all way too good to not have them, just like the siege ones are.

You just don't get it, do you.

Cloaky bonus lokis are used so they don't need to be commited to a 10vs50.
You're talking about things you don't know anything about. How many SP do you have in leadership? Does anyone in your alliance even fly mindlinked commandships/T3s? I bet no.

A triple link loki is unable to fit any sort of tank. It goes maybe the speed of a dual nano hurricane, has worse agility and costs 450m + 100m in implants. They have pretty much the same sig as a Cane, too. They'll just get one/twovolleyed by any artillery BS.

No one needs only one bonus. The skirmish bonuses are all way too good to not have them, just like the siege ones are

Like/Approve

In what way should a command ship be less viable than a t3 which is designed to be flexible. The cruisers should be good at a lot of things, but excel at nothing, especially when comparing to ships that specialize.

I think the offgrid/possed command boosts are in need of fixing as well, it shouldn't be a valid tactic to sit in a pos and help a fleet. The idea is to command, i.e. be a part of the fleet. Not sit in a hidey hole while helping out your side like some middle eastern dictator.

Sorry for the late reply people, been quite busy with other stuff lately.

Feedback!

Tech 2 triage module: acknowledged it's not really worth the training right now; however we don't really want to give it a repairing bonus. Capacitor reduction is a fair option.

Tech 2 bomb launcher: indeed, is also a bit weak on its own, we are considering some options mentioned in this thread.

Tech 2 probe launchers/drone modules: may very well make some faction variants obsolete indeed, it needs to be looked at further.

Sorry for the late reply people, been quite busy with other stuff lately.

Feedback!

Tech 2 triage module: acknowledged it's not really worth the training right now; however we don't really want to give it a repairing bonus. Capacitor reduction is a fair option.

Tech 2 bomb launcher: indeed, is also a bit weak on its own, we are considering some options mentioned in this thread.

Tech 2 probe launchers/drone modules: may very well make some faction variants obsolete indeed, it needs to be looked at further.

Hmm, it's nice to see a boost of 0.5% to the T2 Mining Foreman modules, however I do think the
Mining Laser Field Enhancement should have a boost of 1.625% from 4.5 to 5.625% to keep it pro-ratered inline with the other modules which increase from 2% to 2.5%

As regards to the on-grid/ off-grid discussion regarding gang links, has anyone considered the implications for mining fleets, primarly in low' nul-sec.

There is no way those guys want to have to sit their orca/ rorqual in the belt in order to get bonuses.

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

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.

FIX off grid boosting its the right thing to do

Bomb Launcher is underwhelming, maybe extra capacity for one more bomb and skill requirement to lvl 4?

and giving it extra cap wouldnt make them overpowered? I think that would be worse than making their sphere of influence larger . . .

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...

decreasing the cap use of RR's in triage would be a significant increase in capability but, it would not be overpowered.

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)

(until the baahlgorns get there)

yeah, our average fit is about 12 bil cheaper and still stable. that was our ceo's pimp fit one.

Yea...
fix this please...

and give a little love to miners...

Yea... simple math...
T1 version of Mining Foreman Link - Mining Laser Field Enhancement have base boost of 4,5... when you add 0,5 thats 5... thats only around 10% increase...
T1 versions of other links have base value of 2 and 3... so when you add 0,5... thats increase of around 25% and 18%...

That link have the smallest increase...
and that's not fair...

+1000



just not fair...
+ miners need some love...
don't kill mining further...

Can you link this fit, for science?

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.



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.

I would like to see activated Gang Links apply their bonuses only on the grid of the buffing Ship, as long as some gang member is in that system (self buff even when no other member is on grid)

Carefully worded, normal gang bonuses are good as they are, and it would be sad to loose fitting variations on some self boosting "solo" BC/CS fits.

I would much more appreciate it to fly even a combat irrelevant full boosting CS right in the fight and maybe die, then hide my ass and miss all the explosions.

I think the ganglink increase is dangerous; it makes having a booster more mandatory and smaller groups without any boosters won't stand a chance. I'm sure there are some fellow WH'ers who will attest to how this will affect their pvp in T3s with already overtanked ships.

I think the 2.0 to 2.5% increase is just too drastic. a 2.0 to 2.25% would have been just fine.

with already overtanked ships.

Basically, let a non-specialized ship only give full boosts out to 30km with falloff to 60km while a level V skilled command ship would have an optimal of 100km (with falloff out to 200km). Maybe with some base level of boosts that you would get anywhere in the system (25% effective?).

meh, i tried to link it for you but, ccp doesnt like hyper links to kbs so much. you can find it on our kb under two steps losses however. not too hard to find it.

Have you actually done any calculations yourself or you just want to make T2 links useless cause you cant use them and you will have disadvantage?
2,5% is already low, i think it should be around 3%. Asking for nerfs with the excuse that it will become useful and that you will need one are two opposite things. If it becomes useful it means its in a good state. Btw even T1 links are useful and many FCs are using/asking them. Also the smaller the group the less the impact boosters have. Its clear you have never used gang links, its ok, but first use them and then ask for nerf. Having T2 links is also very time intensive and doesn't really benefit your own single character since you cant use it when not in fleet or if you are not flying a CS.



Overtanked ships benefit the least from resist link.

getting really close to patch day and there is no word on the final state of T2 triage...

[quote=Lek Arthie][quote=Jaigar] That is a 9.77% reduction over the current T1 Ganglink. That is pretty significant, and counting in the other ganglinks as well, that is also an additional 9.77% reduction in cycle time and cap usage.

I dont understand what your purpose here is. It SHOULD be significant. Have you compared T1 and T2 guns? There is a significant dps change between the two. Saying that a T1 gun cant beat a T2 gun so the T2 gun needs a nerf is just wrong.... I really dont get it. Your goal is to make the T2 module useless?.... If there is no real beenfit of using the T2 module, whats the point of the T2 module to exist?
Even with a 2,5% it still is not enough, it needs more. Saying that T2 modules have the same reqs as mindlink is just useless.... So what if they have same reqs. It still needs a lot of time and it still is very time consuming with the charisma req. You need a remap to train effectively.
So to conclude, dont ask for nerfs because you cant use the T2 module. If you think your enemy gains too much advantage get a T2 booster pilot.
Your whole post and your arguments are completely off and wrong.

The point being that when you get the T2 ganglink requirements, all you need is cybernetics 5 to get 50% more effectiveness from the mindlink; there is already more than enough incentive to train those skills.

they're 25% better . . . what more do you want? As a person who did train all of the leadership skills to 5 I think this T2 bonus is more than enough.

if someone dont believe me
Here is math in 3 decimals which corresponds to the actual in game values:

Maximum Skills, Orca
Mining Foreman Link - Laser Optimization (2%)
T1 Mining Foreman Link - Mining Laser Field Enhancement (4.5%)
T2 Mining Foreman Link - Mining Laser Field Enhancement (5%)


with T1 gang links:

Range Link Bonus = 0.045 * 5 * (1 + 5 * 0.10) * (1 + 5 * 0.03) * (1 + 0.50) = 0.5821875

Maximum Laser Range = 15 km * (1 + 0.5821875) = 23.732 km



with T2 gang links:

Range Link Bonus = 0.05 * 5 * (1 + 5 * 0.10) * (1 + 5 * 0.03) * (1 + 0.50) = 0.646875

Maximum Laser Range = 15 km * (1 + 0.646875) = 24.703 km

they're 25% better . . . what more do you want? As a person who did train all of the leadership skills to 5 I think this T2 bonus is more than enough.

That with base bonus of 2% for T1, upgrade on T2 (2,5% bonus) is 14% boost...
That with base bonus of 3% for T1, upgrade on T2 (3,5% bonus) is around 10% (didn't calculate this accurate) boost...
That with base bonus of 4,5% for T1, upgrade on T2 (5% bonus) is 4% boost...


Math for the last case:

You do realize that youre talking about applied effect vs statistic effect?
You do realize that the T2 armor hardener only gets a 10% resist bonus over its T1 variant?

This is why I dislike EFT, because people look at the numbers and not the actual effects in game . . .
Allow me to try some math

Armor EM Hardener I - (50%)
Armor EM Hardener II - (55%)

with a T1 Hardener on an Omen
Base EM Resist = 50%
EM hole to be filled = 50% * 50% module bonus
Applied effect from the module = 25%
Resist net effect = 75%

with a T2 Hardener on an Omen
Base EM Resist = 50%
EM hole to be filled = 50% * 55% module bonus
Applied effect from the module = 27.5%
Resist net effect = 77.5%

So a T2 Armor EM Hardener only provides a 2.5% applied effect more than the T1 yet for some reason everyone uses T2 . . . I wonder why that is . . .

but if you start from 0% resistance and not from 50% you will get that 55% bonus...
only then that calculation you can compare with gang links.

i love when ppl using stacking penalty mechanic to prove something completely different...

ok, i admit that I was being a bit reductio ad absurdum but you understand my point.

People kill for 1-2% thats why people train skills like advanced weapon upgrades to level 5 . . . if you dont think its worth it, dont train for it.

Also, it wasnt technically the stacking penalty I was using to skew my numbers but rather the way resists work because a stacking penalty specifically applies to multiple modules effecting the same stat.

You do realize that youre talking about applied effect vs statistic effect?
You do realize that the T2 armor hardener only gets a 10% resist bonus over its T1 variant?

This is why I dislike EFT, because people look at the numbers and not the actual effects in game . . .
Allow me to try some math

Armor EM Hardener I - (50%)
Armor EM Hardener II - (55%)

with a T1 Hardener on an Omen
Base EM Resist = 50%
EM hole to be filled = 50% * 50% module bonus
Applied effect from the module = 25%
Resist net effect = 75%

with a T2 Hardener on an Omen
Base EM Resist = 50%
EM hole to be filled = 50% * 55% module bonus
Applied effect from the module = 27.5%
Resist net effect = 77.5%

So a T2 Armor EM Hardener only provides a 2.5% applied effect more than the T1 yet for some reason everyone uses T2 . . . I wonder why that is . . .

You do realize that youre talking about applied effect vs statistic effect?
You do realize that the T2 armor hardener only gets a 10% resist bonus over its T1 variant?

This is why I dislike EFT, because people look at the numbers and not the actual effects in game . . .
Allow me to try some math

You, sir, fail at maths (at least, at EVE maths).
Yes, the net resistance in this case is 77.5% versus 75%, which is increase of 2.5 if you consider numeric values, however, resistance percentages do not work this way. You have to look at them as damage reduction, thus it's 22.5% damage versus 25%, which is (1-0.225/0.25)*100 = 0.1*100 = 10% (oh, suprise!).
The other thing is, if you apply a single resistance effect you will always get the same damage reduction in percentages, no matter what base resistance you had there. I will illustrate this by saying, that difference between 95% and 97.5% resistances is the same numeric value of 2.5, while this results in whopping 50% decrease in damage (from 5% to 2.5%).

I hope you understood what i was saying.

This also means that 25% increase in ganglink's base bonus will carry over to 25% increase of link's bonus after all skill, implant and hull bonuses (percentage bonuses are essentially multiplication, and the order in which you make the multiplication does not matter).

On the other hand, difference for t2 links vs t1 links is not 25% per se (well, it is 25% for those links that have 2% base).
We're looking at:
2 -> 2.5 = 2,5/2 = +25%
3 -> 3.5 = 3.5/3 = +16.6(6)%
4.5 -> 5 = 5/4.5 = +11.1(1)%

So, for the mining links in question the difference is: 0.646875 / 0.5821875 = 11.1(1)% (suprise?)

edit:
quick tip: when calculating percent difference we divide the new value by the old value, thus, comparing t2 module to t1 module we do (1 - [t2 mod eff.] / [t1 mod eff.]) * 100

it gets a +5% strength bonus . . .

I agree; with the increased damage of the dreadnaughts, triage carriers could use some additional tank . . . though you risk trivializing supercarriers . . . .

Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:
[list]

Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

Mining Foreman Link GÇô Mining Laser Field Enhancement II: boost increased from 5 to 5.625%: same reason as above, to keep tech2 boost consistent among all gang links.

Feedback is welcome.