Hey everyone, we have a few small changes to announce for the Summer release. Both are follow up changes to help improve the balance around warp speed upgrades.

GÇó We're going to change warp speed rigs to make them stacking penalized with each other.
GÇó We're increasing the set bonus provided by Ascendancy Omegas to 70% for the HG and 35% for the LG. This makes them a little bit better than the WD-618s.

Couldn't care less. Does anybody actually use these implants?

Is there any outside possibility of introducing a lot-slot warp speed module that would help offset the abysmal speed of battleships? One that would perhaps extend +warp speed and -warp speed capacitor use? Something that could be utilized as a travel fit would be a welcome addition for missions, etc.

How about some modules to decrease warp speed? There are use cases...

FOZZIE PLEASE I JUST RIGGED IT
http://i.imgur.com/6Pt11dQ.png
why would you do this to me

We're going to change warp speed rigs to make them stacking penalized with each other.

Don't get me wrong I'm happy the rigs stack but it doesn't cause any really change to anyone other than intercepter s...

We're going to change warp speed rigs to make them stacking penalized with each other.

Why??

I mean, warp speed rigs were useless enough already, why would you stack penalize them?

If anything, they need a buff!

Something only useful in one precise situation (warp) should provide a significant advantage when compared to, say, more tank , more cap, more subwarp speed, actualy useful in combat.

FOZZIE PLEASE I JUST RIGGED IT

http://i.imgur.com/6Pt11dQ.png

why would you do this to me

Because those rigs totally broke EVE. Seems to me like this is yet another change just for the sake of changing.

Thanks for telling everyone you have an untanked rag in PR-8CA :)

im surprised their isn't more ceptors pilots moaning about the small nerf their getting

Where they THAT OP that they needed a nerf? it just made haulers a little bit feasable again; Nobody used the rigs before the warpspeed changes; Now they finally get a - moderate - use and they get nerfbatted immediatly.
Explain why and clarify the OP use cases that you want to address with this.

if you cannot, you should revert the warpspeed rig changes as you do not have any moral ground to do so.

Hey everyone, we have a few small changes to announce for the Summer release. Both are follow up changes to help improve the balance around warp speed upgrades.

• We're going to change warp speed rigs to make them stacking penalized with each other.

Let us know what you think!
-Fozzie

Thanks for telling everyone you have an untanked rag in PR-8CA :)

im surprised their isn't more ceptors pilots moaning about the small nerf their getting

it CLEARLY has 2 invulns on it

So why? Just why? What is it that is so overpowered about them that makes them need nerfing? They are pretty weaksauce at the moment anyway.....

This is not the nerf to power projection we asked for.

This is not the nerf to power projection we asked for.

But was it the one we deserved?

I'll tell you what I think about smartbombing proteus instead if you like

I'll reiterate what I suggested earlierGǪ A low-slot passive module that increases warp speed and decreases warp capacitor use. Call it a "Warp Speed Enhancer" that provides a +20% warp speed bonus and -10% warp drive capacitor reduction (stacking penalized, of course). The idea being is that this module could be combined with a mobile depot for a "travel fit". Then the proposed changes to hyperspacial rigs can be somewhat offset. As a low-slot module, this would be most beneficial to larger vessels like cruisers, battlecruisers and battleships.

"Warp Speed Enhancer" sounds a bit too much like the recent CCP nonsense naming trend. Why not "Ancillary Warp Drive"?

Apparently, CCP wants us to spend half the time watching our BS warping through space at snail speed... they call it "interactive" gameplay. This, added to the warp speed nerf, brings EVE a step closer to complete boredom.

Apparently, CCP wants us to spend half the time watching our BS warping through space at snail speed... they call it "interactive" gameplay. This, added to the warp speed nerf, brings EVE a step closer to complete boredom.

So don't travel in battleships.


Surprise - they have a drawback.


I'm guessing you complain your battleships don't instakill frigates within 100km, too?

Does anyone fly battleships any more?

We're going to change warp speed rigs to make them stacking penalized with each other.

Let us know what you think!

Hehe you clearly don't know a thing about how BS interact with frigates in the game... It's far easier for an Arty Mach (just to name one BS) to instakill a frigate at 100km than at 1km, so next time you make a statement like that make sure you do some fact checking or run it by someone who has some understanding of the game mechanics.

Also. your suggestion of "don't travel in battleships" is as dumb as they come... you can do better than that.

Last week: "We're going to change warp speed rigs to make them stacking penalized with each other."
FanFest: "We're going to allow freighters and jump freighters to use rigs."

The question begs to be asked if this isn't being implemented solely to neuter freighters and jump freighters to some extent.

FOZZIE PLEASE I JUST RIGGED IT

http://i.imgur.com/6Pt11dQ.png

why would you do this to me

read: "instakill"

Arty mach has tradeoffs, such as the much lower DPS, wasting the platform's bonus to falloff, and the hilarious reload times you'll have to deal with when killing the frigates.


Don't travel in battleships. If you choose to do so, you must sacrifice something for the increased performance of the platform. The warp speed changes are great in that regard.

So don't travel in battleships.


Surprise - they have a drawback.

...

Battleship use is very healthy since the warp speed changes. We're keeping a close eye on how people are using the ship classes most affected by the changes and of course many people in the office use battleships for our own activities ingame. So far we are not afraid of battleships becoming uncompetitive..

Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.

Battleship use is very healthy since the warp speed changes.

I cant recall seeing a single battleship for roaming in the last few months.

looking in the wrong places

Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.


The stacking penalty for warp speed rigs is something they should have always had since the beginning. Stacking penalties go a long way to making rig and module combination choices interesting instead of just slapping a max number of one thing onto your ship, and this change will keep warp rigs competitive while also providing some more interesting choices around what your third rig should be. For the record, the stacking penalty only applies to other warp speed rigs, not to the warp speed implants.

Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.

I just got back to work after a bit of post-fanfest death plague recovery. I'm working through a bunch of threads to catch up on what was discussed over Fanfest and the last two days.

I'm all caught up on this thread and I want to quickly address a few things mentioned:

The stacking penalty for warp speed rigs is something they should have always had since the beginning. Stacking penalties go a long way to making rig and module combination choices interesting instead of just slapping a max number of one thing onto your ship, and this change will keep warp rigs competitive while also providing some more interesting choices around what your third rig should be. For the record, the stacking penalty only applies to other warp speed rigs, not to the warp speed implants.

Battleship use is very healthy since the warp speed changes. We're keeping a close eye on how people are using the ship classes most affected by the changes and of course many people in the office use battleships for our own activities ingame. So far we are not afraid of battleships becoming uncompetitive.

We'll continue to look at the stats of the Ascendancies and the WS- implants. It's possible that these changes don't go far enough, and we're open to making more.

Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.

I just got back to work after a bit of post-fanfest death plague recovery. I'm working through a bunch of threads to catch up on what was discussed over Fanfest and the last two days.

I'm all caught up on this thread and I want to quickly address a few things mentioned:

The stacking penalty for warp speed rigs is something they should have always had since the beginning. Stacking penalties go a long way to making rig and module combination choices interesting instead of just slapping a max number of one thing onto your ship, and this change will keep warp rigs competitive while also providing some more interesting choices around what your third rig should be. For the record, the stacking penalty only applies to other warp speed rigs, not to the warp speed implants.

Battleship use is very healthy since the warp speed changes. We're keeping a close eye on how people are using the ship classes most affected by the changes and of course many people in the office use battleships for our own activities ingame. So far we are not afraid of battleships becoming uncompetitive.

We'll continue to look at the stats of the Ascendancies and the WS- implants. It's possible that these changes don't go far enough, and we're open to making more.

if you think stacking penalties make things have interesting choices then why on earth havent you put them on the most goddamn popular rigs in the game (trimarks & cdfes), instead you're putting them on some niche rigs which ALREADY have one of the harshest drawbacks in game (6%~ cpu per rig)

pretty sure i'd think this was idiotic even if i didn't have a titan rigged with these things

We'll continue to look at the stats of the Ascendancies and the WS- implants. It's possible that these changes don't go far enough, and we're open to making more.

I like numbers. Including the proposed change of 70% to HG Omega and 35% to LG Omega, but adding a stacking penalty so that using a WS-6xx with Ascendancy gives the WS bonus a 0.87x penalty, produces a decent progression.:

HG + HG Omega (>115m): 62.17%
HG + WS-618 (510m): 54.75%
HG + WS-615 (140m): 51.26%
HG + LG Omega (>70m): 47.46%
HG + WS-610 (22m): 45.44%
HG + WS-608 (10m): 43.11%
HG + WS-605 (1m): 39.62%

LG + HG Omega (>115m): 47.92%
LG + WS-618 (510m): 46.26%
LG + WS-615 (140m): 42.96%
LG + WS-610 (22m): 37.46%
LG + LG Omega (>70m): 36.87%
LG + WS-608 (10m): 35.26%
LG + WS-605 (1m): 31.96%

LG Omega still struggles to find use, but if its bonus changes to 40% instead of 35%, along with the proposed WS-6xx stacking penalty, it would potentially have a viable niche at 49.50% with the HG and 38.41% with the LG.

(Prices based on a minimum material cost/Jita eye-ball)

Adding stacking penalties to HP and Cap modifiers is something we've been considering for a while, and very well may happen at some point.

That being said, if you want to argue on consistency I'll simply say that since all other mobility modifying rigs are stacking penalized, the warp speed ones should be as well.

We here are CCP are very sorry about how two of the rigs on your titan will be getting a bit less effective.

Adding stacking penalties to HP and Cap modifiers is something we've been considering for a while, and very well may happen at some point.

That being said, if you want to argue on consistency I'll simply say that since all other mobility modifying rigs are stacking penalized, the warp speed ones should be as well.

We here are CCP are very sorry about how two of the rigs on your titan will be getting a bit less effective.

Adding stacking penalties to HP and Cap modifiers is something we've been considering for a while, and very well may happen at some point.

That being said, if you want to argue on consistency I'll simply say that since all other mobility modifying rigs are stacking penalized, the warp speed ones should be as well.

We here are CCP are very sorry about how two of the rigs on your titan will be getting a bit less effective.

By the way... can you give a bit of love to those WD-604 and similar implants? Every time you see his price in Jita a kitten die. STAPH this injustice!

Adding stacking penalties to cap rigs is reasonable also. It'll give mission runners the opportunity of learning about cap management.

However, if you do this I suggest you'll want to look at increasing the base cap recharge of dreads and carriers.

Nothing says "elitism" more than requesting a certain mechanics to be nerfed and yet in the very next sentence requesting to be buffed, just so to prevent it from applying to your playstyle.

I'd hate to see stacking penalties on cap rechargers/relays/CCC rigs, it would be worst idea in the history of CCP Fozzie, but at the same time I would be amused by all the tears from triage carrier pilots.

Let us know what you think!
-Fozzie

I think when you first started this tiericide project you forgot (or didn't know) about the changes to warp mechanics, so it didn't factor it in to your balancing plans... but i could be wrong.

Whatever the case, i can't remember the last time i have seen anything bigger that a cruiser in a fight. It seems like 90% of people only use interceptors to travel these days, which doesn't make for a diverse eve imo.

Please add a ship module that increases warp speed but requires too much power/CPU for a frigate to use.

Yea and I sure would love to hear the lore reason why a bigger ship with presumably bigger/more advanced engines doesn't have the capacity to warp faster than a tiny frigate.

Yea and I sure would love to hear the lore reason why a bigger ship with presumably bigger/more advanced engines doesn't have the capacity to warp faster than a tiny frigate.

Well... generally speaking lighter=faster. Same reason why a neutrino or a photon are faster than more massive particles. Also, the energy needed to change the direction and/or accelerate an object is related to the mass of said object. One would argue that although the engine is bigger, it doesn't put out the required energy to make the ship warp at frigate speed.

IMHO, that's why CCP should buff up the large hyperspacial rigs SUBSTANTIALLY and/or introduce a low-med slot item that would increase warp speed so that you could fit them when travelling long distances.

There is no reasonable case to correlate apparent spacial distance warped with mass.

There's even less of a case to correlate it with brain implants...

The time taken to accelerate a body to a given velocity is a function of mass and force, as we all know. It is also evident from Einstein's work and physical observation that mass increases exponentially to infinity as velocity approaches C.

When a ship is in warp it apparently moves at between 2 and 11 AU per second - between 16 and 80 times the speed of light.

However, warping space does not involve the concept of "velocity" (i.e. distance along a vector over time) at all. If it did, the ship would require all the energy in the universe to reach 0.125AU/s. Before it got to that speed it would be emitting so much radiation that it would evaporate the solar system in which it was moving (not to mention the crew).

There is no reasonable case to correlate apparent spacial distance warped with mass.

There's even less of a case to correlate it with brain implants...

Indeed, mass has nothing to do with warp speed. Just like how the dreadnought catches USS Enterprise in warp, because its engine is more advanced and powerful than the smaller Enterprise. Realistic speaking, bigger ship should warp faster than smaller ship, but has lower velocity and align speed when using conventional engines compare to smaller ships because of the mass.

Back to topic. If the logic of "SINCE EVERYTHING ELSE HAS PENALTY, IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO ADD PENALTY TO THIS MODULE AND WHATEVER ELSE THAT AFFECTS IT REGARDLESS OF ITS ORIGINAL DESIGN INTENT AND DRAWBACK" is what applies here in Fozzie's logic, then we should just add stacking penalty to everything else. Co-Processor, reinforced bulkhead, cargo expander, because somewhere in this tiny eve cluster someone is gonna find a way to make their ship too OP by stacking these things up and make everything else obsolete.

Add stacking penalty to people that fit their ship with multiple disruptor because it's OP and points two people instead of one.
Add stacking penalty to webs because if you put second web on a target it is literally standing still and therefore too OP.
Add stacking penalty to target paint because multiple target paint on one ship allows phoenix to blap my mining barges and therefore too phucking OP.

BTW. NOT ALL ASTRONAUTIC RIG HAS STACKING PENALTY BESIDES WARP SPEED. FOZZIE YOU SHOULD TRY PLAY THE GAME FIRST BEFORE YOU NERF STUFF.

(inb4 Fozzie adds them)

CCP Please, dont you have better things to do? How about that useless auto-targeting missile that nobody ever use? Tweaking things that is perfect the way they are doesn't make you look like you are working hard. Stacking modules makes the environment more diverse as the possibility for fitting ships become endless. Why? Because there is a reason to seek, experiment, and explore the best fit that will overcome your adversaries. Just because everyone's module is equally crappy doesn't make this game diverse.

Granted, if a player would fit different modules on the ship instead of stacking them, it would make the fitting diverse.
IT CERTAINLY LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER, NOT IN REALITY.

The reality is, if your ship doesn't out-stand in certain way when facing stronger opponents ie. blobs, you will have less chance of surviving and don't even think about killing or pvping. And that's why stacking module encourages certain fits although will do terrible at certain aspect, it will do very well in other aspect. And we use the strong point of the fit in hope to counter our adversaries.

And I'm very disappointed at Fozzie for what he said about CCP is really sorry about how our titan is gonna be less effective. It sounded very insincere toward the players coming from a dev. Very unprofessional, and disappointing.

Couldn't care less. Does anybody actually use these implants?

It's great if you fly freighters frequently. The set cuts travel time by a very noticable amount.

How will this work with respect to the new warp speed enhancement modules in Kronos (0.2, 0.25 and 0.3 AU/s)? Will these be stacking penalized with hyperspacial rigs, with each other, not at all - or some combination thereof? Inquiring minds would like to know...

So the ships we spent Hundreds of millions or Billions on in order to make them very fast, are now going to take a performance hit?

Are we going to get our money back?