Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 23 post(s) |
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
549
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 20:02:11 -
[61] - Quote
Overall, this round looks better than the first round of module tiericide.
I would like to point out, however, that there wil still be no reason to use T1 modules, in cases where the meta 1 version is abundantly available and cheaper than the T1 version.
So, are you going to adjust the T1 module build cost (ie. BPO) and the reprocessing value of the meta 1 modules? Ideally, the T1 build cost should always be lower than the meta 1 reprocessing value (don't forget to figure in the 50-55% reprocessing efficiency).
You may want to adjust the T2 module build cost, as well - to make sure that the cost ratio between T2 and T1 is still reasonably high. Remember that most of these numbers have not been tweaked, since the modules were first introduced into the game. Mineral prices - and the sizes of players' wallets - have changed a bit over the years.
Also, are you going to take a look at the current supply of the old metas, which will be aggregated into the new meta 1? And, adjust the NPC drop rate accordingly, as well? |
Amber Solaire
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
45
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 20:25:34 -
[62] - Quote
Why are you turning Meta 4 modules into Meta 1 modules?
Also, by changing named modules, like the Erin MLU, you are automatically nerfing their collector value, as well as their rarity
Renaming anything that reduces the value of an item is just not fair (the named MLUs should not be changed at all) |
VonKolroth
Section 8. Fatal Ascension
42
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 20:35:58 -
[63] - Quote
Dangeresque Too wrote:One of the things I'm not quite liking with this trend, and was hoping would be corrected after the first set of module changes: Why do all these modules have to have short sentences for names? Really what is the point of that mouthfull? Especially when the interface only really has space to show us 2-3 (maybe 4 if they are really short) of the words in the name. When I have a bunch of modules in my hangar I really don't want to have to mouse over each one to see what the heck it is. For a quick example... http://imgur.com/cuXSYN1, you tell me which one those are, and yes, they are all different modules/metas. I can understand some people might be concerned about the "lore" of an item, then why not just put the "lore" into the description. If they really care about the lore they can read about it there, instead of cluttering up my interface with additional info that pushes out the info I actually need or am looking for.
This is how I feel about it. Though if we do insist on keeping flavor text, I would like to see changes made to the market window that makes the sorting of modules clearer for those of us that are fitting ships quickly because our fleet buddies are waiting for us to pitch something together for impromptu roams and the like. Maybe let us have a "Meta Mode" or "Sort by Meta" of some type instead of items always being alphabetically sorted in the left side of the market window.
I'm all about EvE remaining a rich immersive universe, but there are more then a few of us in the game who are more business minded... Almost always finding ourselves in time critical situations and/or just purchasing and fitting a ton of things for newbros who have no idea where to even start when it comes to fitting ships. Putting the flavor at the beginning of the module name does not simplify things in any way, which was my prymary hope for the module tiericide in the first place.
Sent from my Gallente Erabus Titan on -FA- SRP
|
Alexis Nightwish
63
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 20:59:45 -
[64] - Quote
No "Enduring" mining lasers?
Shouldn't the velocity penalty of the Restrained Expanded Cargo (-13%) and the T2 Expanded Cargo (-10%) be swapped so that it is in keeping with the theme of Tech II modules having the most power outside of faction and storyline modules, but with the largest drawbacks?
Why do "Basic" modules have the same or lower penalties than "Restrained" modules? Examples: Expanded Cargos: ________Restrained: -15% structure ________Basic: -10% structure Nanos: ________Restrained: -10% structure ________Basic: -5% structure Reinforced Bulkheads: ________Restrained: -5% cargo ________Basic: -5% cargo Istabs: ________Restrained: +9% sig radius ________Basic: +5% sig radius Overdrives: ________Restrained: -10% cargo ________Basic: -1% cargo Capacitor Power Relays: ________Restrained: -10% shield boost ________Basic: -5% shield boost
Why does the "Restrained" Cap Power Relay have the same penalty as the T1? Shouldn't it be less, or shouldn't the penalty be swapped with the "Compact" version's?
Why are "Basic" modules Meta 6? Is this a mistake or is it for invention purposes?
Power Projection: A Brighter Future
|
Masao Kurata
Z List
179
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 21:11:59 -
[65] - Quote
Amber Solaire wrote:Also, by changing named modules, like the Erin MLU, you are automatically nerfing their collector value, as well as their rarity
Renaming anything that reduces the value of an item is just not fair (the named MLUs should not be changed at all)
I think you must be very confused on this point, the Erin and Elara MLUs are getting merged to a single module with better stats than either, except for a slightly increased fitting cost but the reduced CPU penalty should compensate for that, while Carpo and Aoede MLUs are getting very clear buffs. If anything their prices should go up, they're much better for actual use (as is fitting for their rarity). |
Lara Divinity
Black Scorpion Nomads
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:02:14 -
[66] - Quote
u guys must be really bored there at ccp always changin things |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1672
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:15:27 -
[67] - Quote
Are the faction expander or other modules going to come in BPC form that requires a T2 version maybe?
If not, I do not see why players do not just continue to look at M3 expansion ability and continue to buy the best. Faction. That seems an awful nerf to those T2 markets.
Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.
Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
|
|
CCP Terminus
C C P C C P Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:37:31 -
[68] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:Shouldn't the velocity penalty of the Restrained Expanded Cargo (-13%) and the T2 Expanded Cargo (-10%) be swapped so that it is in keeping with the theme of Tech II modules having the most power outside of faction and storyline modules, but with the largest drawbacks?
Why do "Basic" modules have the same or lower penalties than "Restrained" modules? ... We felt that the T2 Expanded Cargohold was already in a good place, although if we were to follow the trends you'd be correct. In fact it would be even higher unless the T1 module had thepenalty reduced. It's still something we could change before Proteus is released.
In the rebalance, 'Basic' modules are meant to have the lowest restrictions and fitting requirements of all modules, but also the weakest effects. This was the general trend before the rebalance, which has been reinforced through the rebalancing. These modules are a legacy from years ago and are no longer seeded in the game, but the low drawbacks may work for niche fits. |
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5657
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:38:49 -
[69] - Quote
- Miner I
- Miner II
- Blah blah blah mining laser
I would change "mining laser" to "miner" to enhance discoverability in the market UI.
- Nanofiber Internal Structure I
- Nanofiber Internal Structure II
- Blah blah blah Nanofiber Structure
Ignoring the US spelling, I'd change all of these to use the shorter "Nanofiber structure" to enhance discoverability.
- Type-D Restrained Overdrive Injector
Speaks for itself
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
291
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:42:25 -
[70] - Quote
We, too, use a dartboard to choose names on various items |
|
Dan Hour
Isogen 5
6
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:47:11 -
[71] - Quote
I'm not sure if its a type-o or if someone else has brought this up already, but why is the Quote:'Motte' Capacitor Power Relay I straight up better than the faction ones,
- same recharge bonus
- less shield boost penalty
- less fitting
Should that shield boost penalty be higher, or at the least the same as faction?
Edit: for example the second meta item for the cap flux coils has the same bonuses as tech 2 with just less fitting, this should be the same yes? |
Jen Takhesis
The Scope Gallente Federation
91
|
Posted - 2014.12.23 22:47:15 -
[72] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote: [list]
- Type-D Restrained Overdrive Injector
Speaks for itself
Maybe Type-D Increased Mediocredrive Injector instead? |
Terminator 2
Omega Boost
39
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:19:17 -
[73] - Quote
Well i would expect another round of Mining Barges tank buff is needed when you expect players to fit Ingenii MLUs?
Or is this just a planned buff for the ganker income?
Any mining barge - including skiffs - that uses a fitting worth more than 300m isk is a sitting duck waiting to explode by gank action. So you expect us to fit 400m isk Ingenii MLUs? 3 of them? for 1.2b isk? On ships you can't tank up enough to survive in highsec? |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
822
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:39:14 -
[74] - Quote
I was really annoyed when I first read the blog, but after looking a bit more it isn't all that bad. Probably due to the dropping of the Local Hull naming line. I mean seriously who used whatever-D mods? Local hull and beta hull ftw, type d, and Mark I blow!
I will say I am excited to see faction cap mods be better than t2, I think that is the first truly useful thing module tericide has done for the game.
I hope going forward we see some meaningful differentiation between modules. because so far it really seems like unused module cleanup. and well most of the differentiation is meaningless for nearly all applications
also fingers crossed all my local hull i-stabs turn into t2 i-stabs. According to jEveAssets I have 27 of them fit vs 1 t2 version.
I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me!
In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod
- Mara Rinn
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
822
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:42:55 -
[75] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:
- Miner I
- Miner II
- Blah blah blah mining laser
I would change "mining laser" to "miner" to enhance discoverability in the market UI.
- Nanofiber Internal Structure I
- Nanofiber Internal Structure II
- Blah blah blah Nanofiber Structure
Ignoring the US spelling, I'd change all of these to use the shorter "Nanofiber structure" to enhance discoverability.
- Type-D Restrained Overdrive Injector
Speaks for itself
that's the other thing, a lot of the renaming is in parts other than the ones being addressed. webs and neuts being my main gripes (at least the ones I can think of)
I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me!
In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod
- Mara Rinn
|
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
549
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:43:39 -
[76] - Quote
Minor suggestion: I would recommned losing the single quotes on names. It does not add anything to the game lore, and it makes for possible confusion and search-by-name irritation.
Example 1: 'Basic' Capacitor Recharger should just be Basic Capacitor Recharger. Example 2: 'Aoede' Mining Laser Upgrade should just be Aoede Mining Laser Upgrade. |
sytaqe violacea
Circus of midnight Vox Populi.
25
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:57:05 -
[77] - Quote
GOOD
- lore name back
- new faction modules(especially ORE Expanded Cargohold)
BAD
- why no rebalance to WCS? Did you forget those existence?
- Thukker Power Diagnostic System and Caldari Navy Power Diagnostic System have same property while their LP value have huge gap.
- Domination Overdrive Injector has advantage on the Cargo Capacity Penalty, what lore reason make it?
|
Dinta Zembo
Snuff Box Snuffed Out
90
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 00:59:30 -
[78] - Quote
+1 for more cargo and +100 for actually making faction cap rechargers worth buying, nice one |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1830
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 01:27:43 -
[79] - Quote
sytaqe violacea wrote: Thukker Power Diagnostic System and Caldari Navy Power Diagnostic System have same property while their LP value have huge gap.
LP Value is set by the players, not by CCP. |
sytaqe violacea
Circus of midnight Vox Populi.
25
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 01:46:11 -
[80] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:sytaqe violacea wrote: Thukker Power Diagnostic System and Caldari Navy Power Diagnostic System have same property while their LP value have huge gap.
LP Value is set by the players, not by CCP.
Hint: Factinal Warfare
1x Caldari Navy Power Diagnostic System needs 10,000 Militia LP 4,000,000 ISK 1 Power Diagnostic System I 2 Federation Navy Fleet Colonel Insignia I 4 Federation Navy Fleet Colonel Insignia II
1x Thukker Power Diagnostic System needs 45,000 Thukker LP 30,000,000 ISK 1 Power Diagnostic System I
So...if Calmil LP were worth 5~6 times as much as Thukker LP or tag's values were skyrocketed, it will be reasonable to build Thukker one. |
|
Primaxin
PubSwarm Federation Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
5
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 01:50:15 -
[81] - Quote
Again, the naming, while some may quibble about it is not the real problem and gets far too much discussion.
The real problem is for those who do ratting who actually also collect the "loot". Ratting is already a totally repetitive activity with virtually no variation. Every specific type of anomaly is the same each time (there may be 2 variations but you know what I mean).
About the only thing that provides a tiny bit of variety is the value of the loot for a given anomaly. It can vary quite a bit by finding certain rare and desirable meta 4 modules. Apparently that tiny bit of randomness in this otherwise extremely dull activity is too much for the Eve developers. Now we will get the same generic stuff every single time. No chance to have a little excitement by finding something good.
This seems to me to be a step in the wrong direction because it makes an aspect of gameplay that many players use even less interesting than it already is. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
1983
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 02:15:50 -
[82] - Quote
I am an habitual hull tanking addict, and I approve of these tiercide changes on the bulkheads.
I was concerned that a few of my more outre fittings would be made impossible if the 11 tech 1 metalevel bulkheads got merged into three, but at least the Compact keeps low CPU (32 tf) and the Restrained is still useable by a few of the fits, which can get very tight on CPU indeed.
Regarding the naming conventions, I am also in favour, as Sizeof Void says, of removing the quotation marks from the storyline and metalevel modules, because it's a pain to search these.
However, as Dangerous Too points out, module metalevels are not visible in your hangar and you have to show info or at least mousover when you display them as icons. You can get around this with displaying your items in a list, but then you feel like an accountant.
I think that some thought needs to be put to these nomenclature conventions in general, to fix these problems so that the metalevel of the modules is more apparent when browsing your hangar in ocon mode (like most people do), and to assist in text searching in the search bar.
The problem is twofold - display, and searching. eg; lets take the 1600mm plates. If you renamed the modules from 1600mm reinforced nanofiber armour plating to 1600mm nanofiber reinforced armour plating, it would display the metalevel in the icon display mode, and also in list searches the metalevels would be sorted better.
eg, right now a list of 1600mm plates of all metalevels are sorted by '1600mm', then by 'reinforced' (useless, since all share that name) and thirdly by metalevel.
moving to the bulkheads, cargo expanders, nanofibres, for instance, a name sorted list of modules will put all the metalevels together. eg, Type-D's of all module types will be sorted together, separate from Mark I's.
i also think you should make a decision whether to adopt US spelling conventions or English. Nanofiber is wrong, and should be nanofibre. No one in the history of the world has contracted myelofiberosis as a disease, is my point; they all contract myelofibrosis. Therefore, logically, nanofibre is correct and fibre is the correct spelling, end of story. Please change your nanofibres to reflect the correct placement of the r in these words. That's my 5c.
J's before K's.
Prolapse. Turning holes inside out with pew pew.
http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
GetSirrus
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
81
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 02:21:20 -
[83] - Quote
any chance to add in ORE versions of the Mining and Ice upgrades? |
Morihei Akachi
Nishida Corporation
139
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 02:40:37 -
[84] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:i also think you should make a decision whether to adopt US spelling conventions or English. Nanofiber is wrong, and should be nanofibre. No one in the history of the world has contracted myelofiberosis as a disease, is my point; they all contract myelofibrosis. Therefore, logically, nanofibre is correct and fibre is the correct spelling, end of story. Please change your nanofibres to reflect the correct placement of the r in these words. That's my 5c. +1 in favour of European spelling.
Your spirit is the true shield.
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1677
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 02:54:40 -
[85] - Quote
It would be much easier if we could just right-click, Show Group like we can in PYFA or EFT.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Arthur Aihaken
X A X
4044
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 02:57:03 -
[86] - Quote
Really like the proposed changes. Faction modules finally get the bonuses they should've always had.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Lara Divinity
Black Scorpion Nomads
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 03:33:32 -
[87] - Quote
Terminator 2 wrote:Well i would expect another round of Mining Barges tank buff is needed when you expect players to fit Ingenii MLUs?
Or is this just a planned buff for the ganker income?
Any mining barge - including skiffs - that uses a fitting worth more than 300m isk is a sitting duck waiting to explode by gank action. So you expect us to fit 400m isk Ingenii MLUs? 3 of them? for 1.2b isk? On ships you can't tank up enough to survive in highsec?
didnt u know ccp always nerfs in favor for code or gankers i wonder when they gonna do som good for the mining community . ah wait they did they intoduced the prospect lol
|
Lara Divinity
Black Scorpion Nomads
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 03:46:34 -
[88] - Quote
by the way wheres the bonus in this ccp? Ice Harvester Upgrade II514012.5-9 cpu penalty went up by 2.5% compared to what we have now a 10%cpu penalty the cycle time bonus stays the same. like we do need extra cpu penalty ? when is somthing good goin to happen i just wonder could atleast have raised cycle time with 1% to |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5658
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 04:11:02 -
[89] - Quote
Rather than "restrained" how about "stoic"?
It's fewer letters, and less likely to be made fun of (*chuckle* restrained overdrive *snort*)
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
5658
|
Posted - 2014.12.24 04:29:39 -
[90] - Quote
Also, is there anything preventing you readjusting the meta levels so that we have meta 0 for plain T1, then meta 1 for the "better" T1 modules, then meta 2 for T2, with 3 for cosmos, 4 for faction, and headspace/officer starting at 5 and up?
Day 0 Advice for New Players
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |