EVE Search - Scanning Upgrades require activation now?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Scanning Upgrades require activation now?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Oxide Ammar 127	Posted - 2014.05.22 05:42:00 - [121] - Quote Proposal : Make these modules work at lesser degree of effectiveness when they are off and they boost your scanning when you activate them, when they work passive they are at 40-60%, when you activate them they go full enhancement for your scanning attributes.
Belle Mallissima Conquering Darkness 0	Posted - 2014.05.22 06:07:00 - [122] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: One thing to note, this change was requested by quite a few wormhole players immediately after Odyssey and was one of the common requests from the wormhole members of CSM 8. They correctly argued that having these modules passive removes any choice or risk around them and skews the balance between midslots and lowslots for probing ships. I've had this item on my list of CSM requested wormhole improvements for a while. insert personal attack on those WH CSM8 members here As others have said, those modules are only ever fit to covops, which have the tank of a wet paper bag anyway. Their use on any other scanning ship is non-existent. Cloaking tech3 and recons will use the slots for tank or tackle anyway. I do a LOT of scanning, and the passive modules as they are make that a reasonably pleasurable experience. Making these modules active will just get me to scout and scan less, and reprocess all the modules, as they are utterly useless if you're not cloaked. A wormhole dweller who isn't cloaked is just looking to get shot, and if I can't efficiently scan a hostile hole without decloaking, then I plain will not bother. If you want to even the balance between slots, then a low power passive low slot version, and a mid-slot higher power active version will do that quite nicely. Or even, for variety, keep the mid slot variant the low power passive module and put the active module in as a low slot.
Tribal Solidarity Garoun Investment Bank 41	Posted - 2014.05.22 07:44:00 - [123] - Quote This would make total sense if you hadn't nerfed scanning kills to implement these modules but, since you did, the comments about how people managed before these modules existed are pretty much moot.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 936	Posted - 2014.05.22 08:14:00 - [124] - Quote Tribal Solidarity wrote: This would make total sense if you hadn't nerfed scanning kills to implement these modules but, since you did, the comments about how people managed before these modules existed are pretty much moot. What skills have been nerved? German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
Darren Fox NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred 39	Posted - 2014.05.22 08:36:00 - [125] - Quote l0rd carlos wrote: Tribal Solidarity wrote: This would make total sense if you hadn't nerfed scanning kills to implement these modules but, since you did, the comments about how people managed before these modules existed are pretty much moot. What skills have been nerved? Not a nerf as such. Half of the skill bonus from the three supporting astrometrics skills were moved to astrometrics itself Still, this change is a Wormhole Quality of Life reduction as currently suggested. As Cosmic pointed out, the warp changes affected combat scanning as well.
l0rd carlos Friends Of Harassment The Camel Empire 936	Posted - 2014.05.22 09:11:00 - [126] - Quote Right, not even "as such", it was more like a buff because it is now easier / faster to get usefull skills. Also we get new cheaper Virture set that gives 20% scanning bonus. One could say that is a Wormhole Quality of Life increase :) German blog about smallscale lowsec pvp: http://friendsofharassment.wordpress.com
Gosti Kahanid GANOR Deep Space Explorers GANOR INC. 55	Posted - 2014.05.22 09:12:00 - [127] - Quote For the last few years I had no problem with combat- ans chain-scanning in WHs. Maybe I missed something, but can somebody explain to me how scanning is going to be harder than it was a year ago bevore CCP had the ideotic Idea to boost scanning even more with those modules (as the new much more easy to use interface and scanning-system was not enough)?
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 40	Posted - 2014.05.22 10:06:00 - [128] - Quote Gosti Kahanid wrote: For the last few years I had no problem with combat- and chain-scanning in WHs. Maybe I missed something, but can somebody explain to me how scanning is going to be harder than it was a year ago bevore CCP had the ideotic Idea to boost scanning even more with those modules (as the new much more easy to use interface and scanning-system was not enough)? It won't be a 'problem', however, I fail to see why it should be better for scanning to take longer. As I tried to explain in my last post, the usefulness of such a change is negligible compared to the drawbacks for a big number of probers. It's also not a balanced change as it only really affects wormholers negatively. Also, let me mention again that combat probing was already nerfed once not long ago when CCP introduced the sensor compensation skills https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=168820
Gosti Kahanid GANOR Deep Space Explorers GANOR INC. 55	Posted - 2014.05.22 10:20:00 - [129] - Quote Ab'del Abu wrote: Gosti Kahanid wrote: For the last few years I had no problem with combat- and chain-scanning in WHs. Maybe I missed something, but can somebody explain to me how scanning is going to be harder than it was a year ago bevore CCP had the ideotic Idea to boost scanning even more with those modules (as the new much more easy to use interface and scanning-system was not enough)? It won't be a 'problem', however, I fail to see why it should be better for scanning to take longer. As I tried to explain in my last post, the usefulness of such a change is negligible compared to the drawbacks for a big number of probers. It's also not a balanced change as it only really affects wormholers negatively. Also, let me mention again that combat probing was already nerfed once not long ago when CCP introduced the sensor compensation skills https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=168820 Well, this argument I can understand. This could realy be a good reason to look into the formula of scanning. The sensor compensation skills were introduced to counter ECM in the first line, effects on the scanning were a negativ side-effekt of that. Question to CCP SoniCover: Can we do something about this? Or what is your opinion to this argument?
Luscius Uta 86	Posted - 2014.05.22 11:34:00 - [130] - Quote If this change is meant to nerf combat scanning only, why not simply change the modules so they won't affect combat probes? You can also introduce active modules that will affect combat probes but will also provide better bonuses. That way everyone would be pleased. Highsec is for casuals.

Gwen Waokno Laurentson INC StructureDamage 7	Posted - 2014.05.22 11:56:00 - [131] - Quote I'm part of a WH corp. Our evening usually starts with a period of scanning systems (average say 10) to find content. Both PVE and PVP. This change will increase the time we need to scan or decrease the amount of systems we can find content in. Scanning is the least interesting thing to do so it would shift the balance between fun things to do and less fun things to do. Not a good development from my point of view. An important part of our corp is the training of new players. The modules compensate for the low skills of their characters and enable them to participate in scanning WHs. It helps them join our group activities. Effectively removing these modules for WH will increase the skill limit before people can join us. As such it will have quite an impact on our recruiting. Dissapointing. It will reduce the amount of content available for new players.
Sheeana Harb Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact 29	Posted - 2014.05.22 12:33:00 - [132] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: CCP SoniClover wrote: Meytal wrote: CCP SoniClover wrote: I, and countless other players, managed to live in w-space long before these modules existed. So them being passive is not a do-or-die issue for living there. Will their usage drop? Almost certainly, in the short run at least, but this is a change we feel is necessary for the overall balance of scanning. What about making Combat probes ignore these modules? That could accomplish your stated goal everywhere instead of just in wormhole space where cloaking is a must, while simultaneously not nerfing the Core probes. Could be possible, as we're delaying making any changes here until Crius, we can take a look. We'll keep you updated once we dug into it a bit more. Removing there effect from only combat probes does not address the risk vs reward ratio that is brought by them for PVE scanning though. Making them active does. PvE scanning already has an implicit danger from being exposed while hacking, as you are literally a sitting duck.
Morwen Lagann Tyrathlion Interstellar 1187	Posted - 2014.05.22 13:15:00 - [133] - Quote Scanning through the thread (hurr hurr), I've seen a few decent ideas. - Only requiring the modules to be active for combat probes. - Adding a new set of active modules, and keeping the passive ones One I'd like to suggest is giving them similar functionality to what active armor and shield hardeners had before they were tweaked: their usual big bonus to resists when online and activated (55% for T2), and a much smaller passive bonus for when they were online but not activated (5% before skills, iirc). Currently the scanning modules are set up so that the T2 module provides twice the T1 module's bonus. I'll keep that in these example numbers - bear in mind I am not entirely familiar with the calculations so the numbers I suggest may be too small or too large. As a general rule I am making the "active" bonus about 25% stronger than the current bonus, and reducing (but not removing) the passive bonus to about 50% of current values. This way the T1 active bonus remains larger than the T2 passive bonus, but the passive bonuses still provide a small but tangible benefit. Scan Acquisition Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Acquisition Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 10.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 25.00% Scan Rangefinding Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Rangefinding Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 12.50% Thoughts? Morwen Lagann CEO, Tyrathlion Interstellar
Gosti Kahanid GANOR Deep Space Explorers GANOR INC. 55	Posted - 2014.05.22 13:46:00 - [134] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Scanning through the thread (hurr hurr), I've seen a few decent ideas. - Only requiring the modules to be active for combat probes. - Adding a new set of active modules, and keeping the passive ones One I'd like to suggest is giving them similar functionality to what active armor and shield hardeners had before they were tweaked: their usual big bonus to resists when online and activated (55% for T2), and a much smaller passive bonus for when they were online but not activated (5% before skills, iirc). Currently the scanning modules are set up so that the T2 module provides twice the T1 module's bonus. I'll keep that in these example numbers - bear in mind I am not entirely familiar with the calculations so the numbers I suggest may be too small or too large. As a general rule I am making the "active" bonus about 25% stronger than the current bonus, and reducing (but not removing) the passive bonus to about 50% of current values. This way the T1 active bonus remains larger than the T2 passive bonus, but the passive bonuses still provide a small but tangible benefit. Scan Acquisition Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Acquisition Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 10.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 25.00% Scan Rangefinding Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Rangefinding Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 12.50% Thoughts? I Like this Idea. +1 from an old WH-Dweller^^
Morwen Lagann Tyrathlion Interstellar 1188	Posted - 2014.05.22 13:52:00 - [135] - Quote To be fair, looking back at those numbers, I think the passive bonus values could stand to be tweaked downward a little further, but a reduction to 25% of current values seems too harsh. Someone familiar with the calculations will have to take a stab at it! Morwen Lagann CEO, Tyrathlion Interstellar
Meytal School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 419	Posted - 2014.05.22 15:54:00 - [136] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: One I'd like to suggest is giving them similar functionality to what active armor and shield hardeners had before they were tweaked: their usual big bonus to resists when online and activated (55% for T2), and a much smaller passive bonus for when they were online but not activated (5% before skills, iirc). The only negative about this idea is that it still unfairly targets W-space residents while Nullsec and Hisec residents are completely unaffected by these changes. It would make a little more sense if the population levels were the opposite of what they are now, but Nullsec and Hisec have the two largest populations in the game. If you drop combats in Hisec, you're probably hunting for ninja salvage targets. Cloaking is unnecessary. If you drop combats in Nullsec, you probably control the field and are looking for that pod or ship that got away. Cloaking is unnecessary. If you drop combats in W-space, you're probably trying to one-hit scan that combat ship in a Cosmic Signature who doesn't know you're there so you can land on him before your probes spook him. Cloaking keeps you from spooking your target. The suggestion you omitted which proposed that scanning upgrade modules no longer affect combat probes will target each group equally while still achieving CCP's stated goal of making combat scanning a little more difficult.
killerlman BURN EDEN Northern Coalition. 7	Posted - 2014.05.22 16:24:00 - [137] - Quote Meytal wrote: If you drop combats in Nullsec, you probably control the field and are looking for that pod or ship that got away. Cloaking is unnecessary. Not exactly.How can i control the 500~ local while im tryin to find ECCM'd t3? Obv i will get bombers fleet on my ass. To scan me down there is no need to fit anything but probe launcher while im uncloaked.
Alundil Rolled Out 510	Posted - 2014.05.22 16:25:00 - [138] - Quote Yet another very useless and needless change to wspace. Wts scanning mid slot modules as they are pointless for wspace now. CCP, do you even know wth are you doing anymore? No idea who thought this was a good idea. This changes nothing but potentially making scanning take longer than it already does. Gg I guess. System Occupancy Surveillance --áDepe Space Probe redo --áClone Enhancements
Meytal School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 421	Posted - 2014.05.22 17:14:00 - [139] - Quote killerlman wrote: Meytal wrote: If you drop combats in Nullsec, you probably control the field and are looking for that pod or ship that got away. Cloaking is unnecessary. Not exactly.How can i control the 500~ local while im tryin to find ECCM'd t3? Obv i will get bombers fleet on my ass. To scan me down there is no need to fit anything but probe launcher while im uncloaked. No offense intended, but can you restate this? I'm totally not understanding what you've written.
Domanique Altares Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 2766	Posted - 2014.05.22 17:21:00 - [140] - Quote Darren Fox wrote: l0rd carlos wrote: Tribal Solidarity wrote: This would make total sense if you hadn't nerfed scanning kills to implement these modules but, since you did, the comments about how people managed before these modules existed are pretty much moot. What skills have been nerved? Not a nerf as such. Half of the skill bonus from the three supporting astrometrics skills were moved to astrometrics itself Still, this change is a Wormhole Quality of Life reduction as currently suggested. As Cosmic pointed out, the warp changes affected combat scanning as well. There was no nerf. In fact, there was an overall buff, as you ended up with slightly higher probing bonuses per level trained of each if you had them all only trained to 4 or below. Rifterlings pirate corporation is now recruitng members for lowsec PvP operations. Newbie friendly, free T1 frigate and dessy hangar, solo tutoring and PvP classes for new members. Join our in game channel 'weflyrifters' and speak to a recruiter today.

killerlman BURN EDEN Northern Coalition. 7	Posted - 2014.05.22 18:26:00 - [141] - Quote Meytal wrote: killerlman wrote: Meytal wrote: If you drop combats in Nullsec, you probably control the field and are looking for that pod or ship that got away. Cloaking is unnecessary. Not exactly.How can i control the 500~ local while im tryin to find ECCM'd t3? Obv i will get bombers fleet on my ass. To scan me down there is no need to fit anything but probe launcher while im uncloaked. No offense intended, but can you restate this? I'm totally not understanding what you've written. Im telling you that controlling the local isnt controlling the field.When i decloaked i am vulnerable to shoot. The guy who will scan me dont need virtue with pricy hull with fit.But i do,i need virtue and pricy fit to scan and hunt down boosters when huge fleets are fighting. The risk is too high with these changes.
Retar Aveymone BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation 391	Posted - 2014.05.22 18:31:00 - [142] - Quote killerlman wrote: Meytal wrote: If you drop combats in Nullsec, you probably control the field and are looking for that pod or ship that got away. Cloaking is unnecessary. Not exactly.How can i control the 500~ local while im tryin to find ECCM'd t3? Obv i will get bombers fleet on my ass. To scan me down there is no need to fit anything but probe launcher while im uncloaked. To clarify what I think Killerlman is saying: there's a current meta of "unprobable" t3 ships that can only be probed by a virtue-set max-skilled covops with scanning upgrades. Requiring that covops to be uncloaked is essentially breaking the one counter to unprobable t3s. However, I'd argue that this is a symptom of unprobable t3s being broken, not that the scanning modules should stay passive. It should not be required to have a 2b pod in an untanked frigate to probe down an entire fleet of t3s. I think the fix is that the t3 unprobability should be nerfed (probably cap the amount of unprobability you can have at a lower level than now, so you require less to be able to lock onto the most unprobable ships you can get).
Grenn Putubi Swag Co. SWAG Co 54	Posted - 2014.05.22 19:12:00 - [143] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Scanning through the thread (hurr hurr), I've seen a few decent ideas. - Only requiring the modules to be active for combat probes. - Adding a new set of active modules, and keeping the passive ones One I'd like to suggest is giving them similar functionality to what active armor and shield hardeners had before they were tweaked: their usual big bonus to resists when online and activated (55% for T2), and a much smaller passive bonus for when they were online but not activated (5% before skills, iirc). Currently the scanning modules are set up so that the T2 module provides twice the T1 module's bonus. I'll keep that in these example numbers - bear in mind I am not entirely familiar with the calculations so the numbers I suggest may be too small or too large. As a general rule I am making the "active" bonus about 25% stronger than the current bonus, and reducing (but not removing) the passive bonus to about 50% of current values. This way the T1 active bonus remains larger than the T2 passive bonus, but the passive bonuses still provide a small but tangible benefit. Scan Acquisition Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Acquisition Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 10.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 25.00% Scan Rangefinding Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Rangefinding Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 12.50% Thoughts? If any changes are made these are the ones that need to happen. I have to argue though that the passive bonus for the T2 modules should be equal to or greater than the active bonus for the T1 modules. You can't use the T2 modules without having lvl5 in the related skill and taking those skills to lvl5 is a very big investment since they're x5 or x8 skills. Spending 3+ weeks training for the T2 modules should get you a significant improvement over the T1s, if not the T2 modules should be changed to only require lvl3 or lvl4 of the associated skill. Also, the active bonus for these modules should be greater than the passive bonuses they currently provide. If you're forcing us to be vulnerable while using them then we should get a greater benefit than we currently receive. Risk vs Reward...increasing the risk without increasing the reward isn't how the system is supposed to work. The scanning changes and these modules have been in play for a very long time now, some experienced players may not even know there was a time they didn't exist. They've been on your list a long time, but clearly they weren't a priority so they couldn't be overly imbalanced. Small changes may be warranted, but making them active isn't a small change it's a huge one.
unimatrix0030 Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed. 118	Posted - 2014.05.22 21:45:00 - [144] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Scanning through the thread (hurr hurr), I've seen a few decent ideas. - Only requiring the modules to be active for combat probes. - Adding a new set of active modules, and keeping the passive ones One I'd like to suggest is giving them similar functionality to what active armor and shield hardeners had before they were tweaked: their usual big bonus to resists when online and activated (55% for T2), and a much smaller passive bonus for when they were online but not activated (5% before skills, iirc). Currently the scanning modules are set up so that the T2 module provides twice the T1 module's bonus. I'll keep that in these example numbers - bear in mind I am not entirely familiar with the calculations so the numbers I suggest may be too small or too large. As a general rule I am making the "active" bonus about 25% stronger than the current bonus, and reducing (but not removing) the passive bonus to about 50% of current values. This way the T1 active bonus remains larger than the T2 passive bonus, but the passive bonuses still provide a small but tangible benefit. Scan Acquisition Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Acquisition Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 10.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 25.00% Scan Rangefinding Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Rangefinding Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 12.50% Thoughts? I like this idea. If you keep it the way you are planning to do it now, can you tell me why we would use active modules in w-space? We would survive but the module would be basicly useless in w-space.
Masao Kurata Z List 54	Posted - 2014.05.22 22:09:00 - [145] - Quote Morwen Lagann wrote: Scanning through the thread (hurr hurr), I've seen a few decent ideas. - Only requiring the modules to be active for combat probes. - Adding a new set of active modules, and keeping the passive ones One I'd like to suggest is giving them similar functionality to what active armor and shield hardeners had before they were tweaked: their usual big bonus to resists when online and activated (55% for T2), and a much smaller passive bonus for when they were online but not activated (5% before skills, iirc). Currently the scanning modules are set up so that the T2 module provides twice the T1 module's bonus. I'll keep that in these example numbers - bear in mind I am not entirely familiar with the calculations so the numbers I suggest may be too small or too large. As a general rule I am making the "active" bonus about 25% stronger than the current bonus, and reducing (but not removing) the passive bonus to about 50% of current values. This way the T1 active bonus remains larger than the T2 passive bonus, but the passive bonuses still provide a small but tangible benefit. Scan Acquisition Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Acquisition Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Duration Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Duration Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 12.50% Scan Pinpointing Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Deviation Bonus (Passive): 10.00% Scan Deviation Bonus (Active): 25.00% Scan Rangefinding Array I Activation Cost: 10GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 2.50% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 6.25% Scan Rangefinding Array II Activation Cost: 12GJ Activation Time: 12s Scan Strength Bonus (Passive): 5.00% Scan Strength Bonus (Active): 12.50% Thoughts? Excellent suggestion. The exact numbers could do with some tweaking (the tech I modules are too weak compared to tech II, also a problem on tq now, perhaps a 3:4 ratio rather than 1:2), I don't think the passive modules are powerful enough to nerf that much and the active bonuses could be larger because as people are rightly saying nobody sane would decloak to get the current bonuses, and they probably wouldn't for 125% of the current bonuses either. Maybe nerf passive to 75% and buff active to 150%.
Karen Galeo Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate 41	Posted - 2014.05.22 22:36:00 - [146] - Quote Hatshepsut IV wrote: No, just no. This makes them worthless to all of w-space and just about for anyone else. They have little use in buffing scanning sigs, their primary use is making combat scanning faster/better. If your doing this uncloaked your doing it wrong and most of the time your target will get away. ^ Exactly that. If they become active mods, I'll just find something else to fit on my buzzard instead that will be actually useful. Author of the Karen 162-áblog.
Ransu Asanari Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Predictables 116	Posted - 2014.05.22 23:57:00 - [147] - Quote The T1 Exploration Frigates are typically used by new players, who can't warp while cloaked anyway. They can't fit tank and scanning modules well - so forcing them to decloak to activate the module and scan puts them at an unnecessary amount of risk. A new player will have fairly low scanning skills, so it's going to take them a long time to narrow down the signature anyway. Couple this with having to watch DSCAN closely (which they won't be used to doing either) and it makes them easy targets. This change would unfairly punish new players getting into Exploration. Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
Domanique Altares Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 2767	Posted - 2014.05.23 02:45:00 - [148] - Quote Ransu Asanari wrote: This change would unfairly punish new players getting into Exploration. I never felt punished when I started exploring in T1 ships with T1 cloaks before there were such things as scanning upgrade modules. I just learned how to scan. Rifterlings pirate corporation is now recruitng members for lowsec PvP operations. Newbie friendly, free T1 frigate and dessy hangar, solo tutoring and PvP classes for new members. Join our in game channel 'weflyrifters' and speak to a recruiter today.
Rhavas Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 303	Posted - 2014.05.23 04:21:00 - [149] - Quote CCP Fozzie & CCP Soniclover: I now have enough time to fully articulate a reply, so I'm going to borrow from the Greyscale Style Guide and do so. The proposed solution to "combat scanning is too easy" is in fact not a solution that works in an isolated fashion, but instead is a "fix" that will instead lead to other presumably unintended game design problems. I am assuming unintended because you did not specifically mention these unintended consequences as design goals. I am of course open to being told this is intentional, which will of course change my argument since these being intentional would be of even greater concern in my mind. I instead propose a "scalpel" fix rather than what I perceive here to be a "chainsaw" fix. In short, if you wish to reduce effectiveness of combat scanning, you should reduce effectiveness of combat scanner probes. The proposed fix does have the intended effect of reducing combat scanning effectiveness. I am also disappointedly aware that you did in fact discuss this with my corpmate and friend James Arget and he is or was in support of your proposed approach. Understand that James is someone I greatly respect, have spent a lot of time with, and love to fly with. Understand also that he is first an FC, second a game mechanic. If he says these modules are a bit OP, he is probably right. However, James is not a scanner. I can't remember the last time he was driving chain scanning. He creates content by leading fleets and theorycrafting. He doesn't do it by scanning for hours. I do. Your proposed fix is in fact a nerf primarily to cloaking, not scanning. It comes at the expense of cloaked operation (an effective imperative where I live in wormhole space, as others have mentioned) and at the expense of site probing. It effectively gives wormhole dwellers a Hobson's Choice - which is to say no choice at all. Wormhole dwellers will simply not use these modules - cloaking is too important. Therefore a presumed secondary goal - creating PVP opportunities - and a presumed tertiary goal - player choice of approaches - will in fact accomplish neither. In addition, as many have outlined, this is a direct impact to lower-skilled players, making them less effective by an order of magnitude rather than a linear amount. The only thing you will accomplish for wormholes is to make the most time-consuming thing we do - scanning systems of 5-30 signatures - even slower. While it accomplishes your goal it is primarily a net reduction in fun per hour. I personally do not agree that combat scanning is OP, but let's assume for the moment I am wrong - I am a scanner but I am not a comparative module balance theorycrafter because :math:. If combat scanning is OP, then it is far more elegant - and controllable (i.e. able to reduce unintended consequence) to nerf combat scan probes directly. Add a penalty to combat scanner effectiveness to the CovOps cloak if you must - and you accomplish the same end without nasty side effects. You could even do it as Morwen Lagaan suggests, and have a variable cloaked vs uncloaked bonus - but I encourage you to tackle the source of your concern, which is combat probing, not cloaking, and not core probing. Author of Interstellar Privateer Shattered Planets, Wormholes and Game Commentary
Steven Hackett Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 30	Posted - 2014.05.23 04:59:00 - [150] - Quote As a guy who lives in WH's and scan every time i'm on, I support changes to those silly modules. Scanning was changed a lot in Odyssey, it was made so easy that it was stupid. I know of people who stopped buying their Virtue implant sets because scanning was now so easy that the implants simply didn't give them enough of an edge Scanning a signature with Astrometrics 5 and supports at 4, most of the time only takes 2 sweeps when flying a T3 without the modules and without any scanning implants. With scanning modules, implants etc. there is simply no edge to training your skills. In my opinion you shouldn't nerf the modules, you should throw them in the big bad garbage truck and never think about them again.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.