| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
   |
Posted - 2006.07.26 01:36:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Luc Boye on 26/07/2006 01:43:58
Rewind back to summer of 2003. MWD was a module that gave bonus to speed, no penalties. You could fit as many of them as you wanted. So people fit rack of mwd's on scorpions for giggles.
CCP responded with introducing penalties for fitting mwd. So if you fit bunch of mwd's your cap shrinks so much that you can't fire all those mwd's.
Then we come to 2004, GNW and the age of dual-ab mallers. Now CCP fixes problems in the way they should have done in first place, restrict to only 1 mwd/ab, introduce agility issues when fitting oversized modules, etc.
So now we have a module that has cap penalty to forbid fittings that are already restricted by the measures done in 2004.
What mwd cap penalty did at same time was nerf all types of blaster boats cruiser size and upwards. The problem with now obsolete penalty is solved by introducing silly bonuses like "-10% cap penalty when fitting mwd". How nice. Whole class of ships are nerfed by the fact that they actually have only 1 useful bonus, instead of 2. So blasterboats either lack tracking, or tanking capabilites, or are too slow/heavy to do what they are supposed to do.
Un-nerf mwd, since we can't fit 2 of them nowadays anyway. And voila, blasterboats solved.
thorax: medium hybrid dmg bonus + agility bonus = true blasterboat.
deimos: same thing, finally it has a chance of performing in his primary role, instead of being laughed at by other hacs.
megathron: leave bonuses as it is, it has more cap, so it has some chance to tank, even pityful one.
hyperion: ditch the mwd "bonus" for something useful... like god forbid tracking bonus.
So question is, why is there a cap penalty on mwd nowadays? The original reason it was there is not a problem anymore.
|
Ernest Graefenberg
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 01:43:00 -
[2]
Me love you long-time.
|
Durethia
RillaCorp
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 01:47:00 -
[3]
I think I have a better idea.... for blaster boats as I do fly them.
1) Remove the cap penalities through out like you suggest.
2) For blaster boats... forget tracking... blasters have excellent tracking out of the box.
For Gallente Cruiser skill
a) 10% reduction in powergrid requirement for fitting MWD per level
b) 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Damage per level
ching... my two cents. I think the PG requirements of the MWD in regards to a blaster boat is ridiculous.
A prince ought to have no other aim or thought, nor select anything else for his study, than war and its rules and discipline...
--Nicolo Machiavelli (1505 AD) |
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 01:53:00 -
[4]
Not sure if shield penalty should go as well, since it doesn't bother megathrons, but to be fair remove that one as well, since it gives more shields for caldari / minnie to balance things out.
Keep the sig ratio penalty, cos that balances issues between different ship classes.
|
rgreat
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:06:00 -
[5]
Edited by: rgreat on 26/07/2006 02:06:46
 Originally by: Durethia
For blaster boats... forget tracking... blasters have excellent tracking out of the box.
You probably meant small blasters on cruisers... ;)
Luc Boye! +1.
|
Cohkka
LoneWolf Mining
R i s e
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:08:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Luc Boye
Not sure if shield penalty should go as well, since it doesn't bother megathrons, but to be fair remove that one as well, since it gives more shields for caldari / minnie to balance things out.
Keep the sig ratio penalty, cos that balances issues between different ship classes.
That penalty was removed a looooong time ago.
Don't speak english, just F5, F5, F5... |
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:11:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Cohkka
Originally by: Luc Boye
Not sure if shield penalty should go as well, since it doesn't bother megathrons, but to be fair remove that one as well, since it gives more shields for caldari / minnie to balance things out.
Keep the sig ratio penalty, cos that balances issues between different ship classes.
That penalty was removed a looooong time ago.
Thx for info, never cared about that particular penalty much =)
|
Maya Rkell
Corsets and Carebears
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:13:00 -
[8]
mm. I'd be concerned about the bonus this would give to frigates, tbh.
|
Wesley Harding
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:14:00 -
[9]
The so-called MWD bonus for the Thorax is pretty cheap. Why not just give it a flat max cap bonus like the Apoc gets? It amounts to the same thing and it's not useless if you don't fit a MWD.
|
Nebuli
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:15:00 -
[10]
Couldnt agree more, was thinking the other night about things that have been nerfed, then at a later date fixed correctly but the original nerf not removed, but I'm having a brain freeze atm and cant think of any lol.
But yep 100% sign, no reason for the cap penalty these days, it doesnt achieve anything, and as you say blasterships could get proper bonus's instead.
Oh btw whoever said tracking on blasters is fine, you say you fly blasterships but I'm assuming you must only fly frigs/cruisers?
The only reason mega hits ok with them now is the tracking bonus got buffed, before one to many mwd cycles and you arent gonna be hitting the enemy ship for some time as you patiantly wait for the speed to reduce (which is why I cant see this tier 3 ship working, not only is it faster than mega, it doesnt get any tracking bonus)
One of the best ideas I've heard in a long time on how to sort blaster ships out.
/sign
CEO - Art of War |
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:15:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
mm. I'd be concerned about the bonus this would give to frigates, tbh.
Well, I've been thinking about it, say all inties use mwd, so they all benefit in same way.
AB is still useful, because you dont have sig ratio penalty, it works in deadspace and it has lesser fitting requirements.
|
Pattern Clarc
Dark Destiny Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:16:00 -
[12]
I thought about removing the 25% cap penaty inplace of 10% more to cap useage of MWD's a cycle but then
you already have a sig radius nerf, power grid annhiliation and cap per cycle joke also.
I love MWD's, but it's not an easy marrige...
So many penalties on 1 module
|
Maya Rkell
Corsets and Carebears
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:19:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Luc Boye
Originally by: Maya Rkell
mm. I'd be concerned about the bonus this would give to frigates, tbh.
Well, I've been thinking about it, say all inties use mwd, so they all benefit in same way.
AB is still useful, because you dont have sig ratio penalty, it works in deadspace and it has lesser fitting requirements.
I suppose. Tbh actually that'd work with a 10% less fitting bonus for MWD's for AF's...
|
Breed Love
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:20:00 -
[14]
Completely agree that MWD cap penalty should go. There already is sig radius increase which is enough of a penalty and high cap use.
------ Originally by: Gazon
In any case, the whole affair had one lasting effect: Awarding Stormriders the label of ridiculous drug addicts with a tendency towards utterly foolish actions.
|
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:26:00 -
[15]
I think that agility bonus instead of mwd "bonus" should work well on thorax/deimos, keep same dps, same slot layout, but give them faster acceleration so that they can close in and do their work. Neither of the ships can tank that much, nor fit any impressive loadouts, but it would be a step in right direction.
Ok you are forced to fit ions, and you can't really tank that well in deimos, but its absolutely stupid to just sit there while enemy is running circles around you and kill you slowly.
|
Nebuli
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:30:00 -
[16]
Not sure about an agility bonus, I think that should realy be built into the ship itself rather than being a bonus, I mean what designer designs a close range ship thats as slow as a dog?
Vaga being a good example, dont think diemos should be "as" fast, but it should be alot faster than it is naturaly.
Think tracking and damage would be the best bet tbh.
CEO - Art of War |
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:33:00 -
[17]
Well my idea was if devs had any reason (thats beyond me) for designing a close range hac that moves like a brick, at least you could reduce it by hac level. But as gallente fanboy I'd agree with agile ship and tracking bonus. Kinda like vagabond.
|
Awox
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:47:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Durethia
ching... my two cents. I think the PG requirements of the MWD in regards to a blaster boat is ridiculous.
Yeah, because autocannon boats don't have the same penalties as blaster boats. This isn't a GALLENTE thing people, this is an MWD thing. Make it easier for more cruisers to use :)
-
nerf 0.5+ |
Jerick Ludhowe
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
Verisum Family
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:52:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Awox
Originally by: Durethia
ching... my two cents. I think the PG requirements of the MWD in regards to a blaster boat is ridiculous.
Yeah, because autocannon boats don't have the same penalties as blaster boats. This isn't a GALLENTE thing people, this is an MWD thing. Make it easier for more cruisers to use :)
ACs don't exactly use much cap, nor do they use much grid to fit .
I do agree with your post as a whole though. This is a MWD issue not just a Gallente issue.
|
Pattern Clarc
Dark Destiny Inc.
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 02:58:00 -
[20]
it's sad that a MWD has to automatically f0kup your tank.
|
Lorette
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 03:15:00 -
[21]
I agree, MWD has so much going against it its not funny...in most cases you can lose the cap penalty/high cap usage/lack of unusability (DS)/insane sig radius boost and much lower fitting cost all for 1/3rd the speed (get an AB instead) 
|
Xrak
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 03:24:00 -
[22]
Yes I totally agree here aswell. The MWD cap penelty is not needed.
Tracking
Falloff
Agility
Damage
ROF
They are all very useful parts that can be used for a new bonus.
|
BlackRain
Black Nova Corp
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 03:27:00 -
[23]
<3 Luc
..
-------------------
- |
Madcat Adams
Mission Runners Anonymous Incorporated
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 03:34:00 -
[24]
*sighned*
If there is concern about this overpowering friggies, then scale the penalty. Leave frig size at 25%, make cruiser 15%, and BB size 5%.
And fix the forms so they quit eating my posts. 
Bloody soon. 
|
Dixon
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 03:35:00 -
[25]
Without the cap penalty the MWD becomes the no-brainer it shouldn't be... that's why we have it.
|
Luc Boye
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 03:51:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Dixon
Without the cap penalty the MWD becomes the no-brainer it shouldn't be...
In what sense my noble sire? Care to elaborate?
Originally by: Dixon
... that's why we have it.
I remember CCP introducing the cap penalty back in 2003 for the above mentioned reasons, and I am quite sure that "no-brainer" or any form of intellectual stimuli was not one of them.
|
Miels
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 04:13:00 -
[27]
All in one module, mind.
MWD: greater dps from controlling engagement range
MWD: less dps taken from transversal / outrunning explosion velocity / controlling engagement range
MWD: makes approach and retreat much faster - crucial for tackling
if you're going to put 3 module's bonuses in one, it should have a suitable penalty
who wouldn't fit mwd if it wasn't a big penalty to do so?
|
Zaratuul
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 04:36:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Zaratuul on 26/07/2006 04:36:33
Originally by: Miels
All in one module, mind.
MWD: greater dps from controlling engagement range
MWD: less dps taken from transversal / outrunning explosion velocity / controlling engagement range
MWD: makes approach and retreat much faster - crucial for tackling
if you're going to put 3 module's bonuses in one, it should have a suitable penalty
who wouldn't fit mwd if it wasn't a big penalty to do so?
I guess you are alt of someone who flies a raven then?
dps: only viable for close range ships, thats 2 out of 8 configs for BS across all races. Without mwd they don't function AT ALL.
movement: so everybody should stand still as well?
tackling: so you suggest that interceptors dont fit mwd and don't tackle? What should they do then I wonder, snipe?
|
Mnengli Noiliffe
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 07:30:00 -
[29]
Actually, 10% less cap penalty for mwd bonus, when maxed, end you up with more cap with mwd than without. This is very good bonus, so certain ships (Vigi, Vindi) would require something good in return...
|
Sarmaul
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2006.07.26 07:34:00 -
[30]
This thread gets the Sarmaul Seal of Spammage (aka /signed)
I've always felt one of the penalties needed to go.
1) Insane fitting reqs
2) -25% cap penalty
3) High cap use
4) Sig radius
Remove the cap penalty, and give blaster boats with a MWD bonus a reduction to the cap use of MWDs instead or something just as fancy. It would let them run the MWD for much longer which I assume would make blastership pilots happy.
TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS
- In Rust We Trust - |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |