EVE Search - MMJD / BC / BS Changes & Power Creep

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

MMJD / BC / BS Changes & Power Creep

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Prometheus Exenthal mnemonic. 676	Posted - 2014.12.27 07:13:44 - [1] - Quote Rather than posting a large wall of text that will likely be skimmed, here's the gist Issues Stop boosting ships for excessive speed, kiting, and damage application. The RLMLs, Orthus, and the new Recons/Destroyers are examples of ships/items crippling all classes beneath their price bracket. BC/BSs are stagnant because they are slow & fat. AWFUL ships for extended roaming. MMJD have potential, but currently require gimping your setup to utilize them Solutions Slightly increase BC agility Change the MMJD into a script for MWDs. They are still locked to their specific hulls. It doesn't make sense to currently use an MMJD because you are totally dead in the water. Only a select few can sport both modules without totally compromising their setup, but the module still has little use. This should result in far more versatile/mobile BCs / BSs that do not require gimping setups to fit. Load script -> MMJD mode Unload script -> MWD mode It's really simple and would help to rejuvenate the BS & BC hulls. -áwww.promsrage.com
Marlona Sky Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 5833	Posted - 2014.12.27 08:11:13 - [2] - Quote This sounds interesting. Supported. The Paradox
Aliventi Hard Knocks Inc. 795	Posted - 2014.12.27 08:15:51 - [3] - Quote I think modifying MWDs as you described is an excellent boost to BCs. You have all my +1s. I personally would love to see this extended to LMJDs so BS fleets can get more mobility too. Also, I would like to see two types of scripts. One scripts that allows you to jump 50km for half the MJD cooldown (100km moves the BC out of lock and damage range. 50km would allow the BC to stay in lock and damage range when using long range weapons.), and another script that is the 100km with the full cooldown. Either way I hope CCP makes it so!
Bullet Therapist Caldari Provisions Caldari State 229	Posted - 2014.12.27 08:34:13 - [4] - Quote There's already a call for another balance pass to re-balance battleships. Unless the module defines the ship class I think I'd rather see the hull's base stats changed. Not a bad idea though.
Milton Middleson Scrap Metal Squadron 557	Posted - 2014.12.27 09:26:36 - [5] - Quote The first issue seems to be somewhat off-topic. Other than that, I fully endorse the concept. I think the heat for MMJD is the more elegant of the two, since it flows better, doesn't involve juggling scripts, and adds a distinct trade-off to picking an MMJD over an MWD without being a severe drawback.
SmarncaV2 Snuff Box Snuffed Out 69	Posted - 2014.12.27 12:46:55 - [6] - Quote +1 i miss battlecruisers
Abyss Azizora Temporary Corp 12 137	Posted - 2014.12.27 12:53:36 - [7] - Quote Ugh... your post doesn't actually contain a single suggestion for fixing battleships, currently being borderline obsolete in Eve online. Despite your double claim that it does in that same post. But I whole-heartedly support the buff to BC's though I'm not that fond of the MMJD changes proposed.
Jonathan Xavier Discrete Solutions Ltd. 5	Posted - 2014.12.27 16:05:11 - [8] - Quote I really like this idea.
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci Jovian Labs Jovian Enterprises 15470	Posted - 2014.12.27 16:10:47 - [9] - Quote +1 for sure- and extending the same thing to Large MJDs would really start to help battleships come back to life. A City made of Wood is built in the forest A City made of Stone is built in the mountains But a City made of Dreams...is built in heaven. Jovian Proverb GÖâ
Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 75	Posted - 2014.12.27 16:10:53 - [10] - Quote If scripted, maybe add multiple scripts for 50/75/100 km jumps? My current issue with MMJD is that you never really need a 100 km jump in a CBC offensively. Right now it's a pure escape tool, that is really easy to stop, so it's not seeing use
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 454	Posted - 2014.12.27 16:16:47 - [11] - Quote This is different enough from the thread I am running HERE that I am interested in seeing actual specifics. I don't think giving a MMJD the ability to also be a full power MWD is a good idea though. Maybe a toned down version, like a 250% -400% increase in speed vs. the 500% of a true MWD, with a strong cap penalty. Making battleships worth the warp Tech 3 battleships. Moar battleships
Prometheus Exenthal mnemonic. 686	Posted - 2014.12.27 21:27:20 - [12] - Quote Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote: +1 for sure- and extending the same thing to Large MJDs would really start to help battleships come back to life. My mistake, I thought I was clear enough in my original posting. This would apply to the LMJDs as well James Baboli wrote: This is different enough from the thread I am running HERE that I am interested in seeing actual specifics. I don't think giving a MMJD the ability to also be a full power MWD is a good idea though. Maybe a toned down version, like a 250% -400% increase in speed vs. the 500% of a true MWD, with a strong cap penalty. In my post I mentioned that they could be a lower speed mwd with jump capability. -áwww.promsrage.com
Maria Dragoon Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 39	Posted - 2014.12.28 03:57:51 - [13] - Quote With the incoming module rebalances and changes, where modules will be balanced so that you actually give up something to get something instead of a direct upgrade if you pay more, some of these points may be a bit moot. Lets see where these module reblance take us first. :)
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 435	Posted - 2014.12.28 04:13:37 - [14] - Quote Bullet Therapist wrote: There's already a call for another balance pass to re-balance battleships. Unless the module defines the ship class I think I'd rather see the hull's base stats changed. Not a bad idea though. Honestly all battleships need much greater ranges and better lock distance. I don't see how someone can say to sit back and pound an enemy when a good percentage of our weapons have max ranges under 20km. Battleship mounted cannons from 1914 shot up to 22km. In the year 22,000 surely the average battleship weapon in a vacuum can do better. Game balance doesn't work on """""lore""""" but some respect for the fact that a battleship needs a place as high hp/high dps/long range and that it onlu marginally scrapes through on all 3 is a problem. I try to fly battleships on SISI fairly often to get an impression of how to use them and... they're just bad. A couple good ones, a couple gimmick ships and then the rest are terrible. Join channel Aussies in space to chat with AU/NZ players
Valkin Mordirc 484	Posted - 2014.12.28 07:26:45 - [15] - Quote This seems like an actual good idea. +1 `#DeleteTheWeak`
Prometheus Exenthal mnemonic. 691	Posted - 2014.12.28 08:12:24 - [16] - Quote Maria Dragoon wrote: With the incoming module rebalances and changes, where modules will be balanced so that you actually give up something to get something instead of a direct upgrade if you pay more, some of these points may be a bit moot. Lets see where these module reblance take us first. :) None of those module rebalances have anything to do with what's being discussed in this thread -áwww.promsrage.com
Quadima From Our Cold Dead Hands The Kadeshi 116	Posted - 2014.12.28 08:45:16 - [17] - Quote +1 for MWD becoming MJD with a script / mod BUT, it should have a long ( 30 second ? ) loading time, so you can't just switch it out at any moment. I see this situation: "Oops, seems we're losing this, enemy too fast, can't kite ... turn off MWD, put instant script, jumpdy jump..." Saving a huge amount of PG by having a hybrid module instead of two and actually keeping your ship useful would be great !
Olga Yoska Ministry of Lag 0	Posted - 2014.12.28 14:42:05 - [18] - Quote Maybe can be good also add afterburner script, then in pvp you have more options in critical situation, and this thing can change eve play style. But it require a 30-60 seconds before you can change script.
Liam Inkuras AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 1379	Posted - 2014.12.28 15:03:44 - [19] - Quote Prom, cool idea, but not really my cup of tea. I think the biggest power creep issue right now is speed, and to solve that, I would just give a sweeping 15% nerf to speed across the board for ships small than BC I wear my goggles at night. Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 521	Posted - 2014.12.28 17:57:00 - [20] - Quote Liam Inkuras wrote: Prom, cool idea, but not really my cup of tea. I think the biggest power creep issue right now is speed, and to solve that, I would just give a sweeping 15% nerf to speed across the board for ships small than BC But Liam, do you really wanna end the nano age 2.0 so soonGäó?? signature
Vic Jefferson GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 105	Posted - 2014.12.28 18:55:56 - [21] - Quote While cool, it is a bit of a band-aid fix to a much bigger problem. I'd rather they did the comprehensive surgery needed here rather than just treating symptom after symptom.
Prometheus Exenthal mnemonic. 698	Posted - 2014.12.28 20:21:49 - [22] - Quote Quadima wrote: +1 for MWD becoming MJD with a script / mod BUT, it should have a long ( 30 second ? ) loading time, so you can't just switch it out at any moment. I see this situation: "Oops, seems we're losing this, enemy too fast, can't kite ... turn off MWD, put instant script, jumpdy jump..." Saving a huge amount of PG by having a hybrid module instead of two and actually keeping your ship useful would be great ! The script mechanic would be slower than the current method. Currently you can be MWDing and then enable your MJD, which is exactly what you are talking about. MJD have a startup time AND a cooldown. Scripted, it would be slower than the current method. You'd need to wait until your MWD cycle ended, load the script, start the MJD & wait for the thing to start up before blasting you off. -áwww.promsrage.com
Lugh Crow-Slave 357	Posted - 2014.12.28 20:26:11 - [23] - Quote Vic Jefferson wrote: While cool, it is a bit of a band-aid fix to a much bigger problem. I'd rather they did the comprehensive surgery needed here rather than just treating symptom after symptom. lol have you met CCP
Pyralissa Kite Co. Space Trucking Brave Collective 5	Posted - 2014.12.28 20:39:50 - [24] - Quote One of the more interesting ideas I've seen put forward.
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 194	Posted - 2014.12.28 22:57:14 - [25] - Quote I bet this would bring more larger ships to lowsec...
Aliventi Hard Knocks Inc. 796	Posted - 2014.12.29 18:34:40 - [26] - Quote Part of why this would work really well for BCs and BS is that CCP can't really add another mid slot and the fittings so that BC/BS could fit a MJD free of charge or at a discount. The reason why is that a lot of these ships would quickly become unbalanced if you were to use the extra slot and fitting for something else. By combining the MWD and MJD into a scripted MWD you get around that issue entirely while boosting the mobility of the BC/BS to useful levels.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 619	Posted - 2014.12.29 18:49:49 - [27] - Quote Aliventi wrote: Part of why this would work really well for BCs and BS is that CCP can't really add another mid slot and the fittings so that BC/BS could fit a MJD free of charge or at a discount. The reason why is that a lot of these ships would quickly become unbalanced if you were to use the extra slot and fitting for something else. By combining the MWD and MJD into a scripted MWD you get around that issue entirely while boosting the mobility of the BC/BS to useful levels. Or bake them into the hulls entirely
Prometheus Exenthal mnemonic. 701	Posted - 2014.12.29 22:05:58 - [28] - Quote @afkalt I did think of something like baking them into the hulls, but that seemed unnecessary. Scripting the MJDs or replacing the module with an MWD/MJD hybrid is a much more elegant solution. https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1844	Posted - 2014.12.29 22:15:47 - [29] - Quote afkalt wrote: Or bake them into the hulls entirely The only time modules should ever be baked into a hull is on a specialist T2 class of hulls. Otherwise baking stuff in is boring and removes diversity of fittings.
Tusker Crazinski Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels 10	Posted - 2014.12.30 00:50:12 - [30] - Quote Fist of all I don't see kiting as an issue. ironically the changes you proposed would actually allow BCs for further avoid getting caught, and mitigate and void damage. Really the issue with "kiting" ships is they also have massive tanks, and include things like the Ishtar. Drones simply need to be hit with the nerf bat so hard the blow could be heard near alpha centari. and missiles boats just need to be less **** proof and tanky. with these ships if you can catch them they'll still apply the same damage and probably out tank you. whereas a shield kite / Oman gun boat gets scrammed it's generally 100 percent ****. That being said +1 this would have been a better way to introduce MJDs
masternerdguy Inner Shadow Did he say Jump 1792	Posted - 2014.12.30 03:13:02 - [31] - Quote I really like this idea and believe it will improve the game. The script needs a long loading time (60 seconds seems reasonable) to prevent abuse, and should only apply to MWDs. Alternatively, MJDs could be more like an ASB in that it only is a MJD while loaded with a charge it consumes but when not loaded it is a sub-par MWD (massive energy consumption for what you get). Things are only impossible until they are not.
Sard Caid Screaming Hayabusa Neo-Bushido Movement 108	Posted - 2014.12.30 06:45:54 - [32] - Quote To preface this post, I feel like MJDs for BC and BS are at an okay spot right now. I haven't been frustrated by their implementation other than by how cheesy they can be defensively. If this change were to be a thing, I feel fitting requirements for MJD modules should increase, given the additional benefit of the hybrid module. I don't think heat should incite the MJD affect; rather only affect the MWD speed bonus as per normal MWD heat benefits. Instead of a script, allow the module to be interacted with using right click context menu to select MJD mode, or by use of a radial UI element to achieve the same affect. I strongly dislike the use of scripts as I feel that they're an archaic means of altering module behavior, and would prefer module mode swapping to be inherent to the module. How you described swapping from MWD to MJD mode, ie stopping the active module and swapping to MJD mode sounds appropriate.
Sard Caid Screaming Hayabusa Neo-Bushido Movement 108	Posted - 2014.12.30 06:58:38 - [33] - Quote That said, I'd like to add that I only feel that shield tanked ships are the losers with the addition of MJD modules, as tying two midslots to MWD + MJD is a huge burden to their tank as well as fitting. What I find curious about the two modules "totally compromising the setup" of most BC or BS is that many BC and BS gained midslots from rebalance efforts, or in the past typically didn't have propulsion modules fitted (many shield tanked BS, Amarr BS). Many BC/BS now have the option to fit a prop or even dual prop, where it wasn't an option previously. I like that the MJD requires a dedicated midslot and extra fitting to use; I think it'd be a silly ability for BC/BS to have otherwise. I think most BC/BS can get by using MWD + MJD fittings in ways that are effective and useful. I think making a hybrid module as you described would allow BC/BS to disengage or offensively blink more casually, without addressing the core cause for stagnation of BC/BS PvP in the current meta game. Given that I feel MJDs are fine as implemented, I would prefer to see buffs/nerfs to BC/BS and other classes to facilitate change before giving every BC/BS a get out of jail free card versus opponents without scramblers.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 620	Posted - 2014.12.30 08:21:08 - [34] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: afkalt wrote: Or bake them into the hulls entirely The only time modules should ever be baked into a hull is on a specialist T2 class of hulls. Otherwise baking stuff in is boring and removes diversity of fittings. Well, to a point. Prop mods aren't really 'optional' in 99.99% of cases and it means there's no weird coding needed to stop my 100MN fit stabber MJDing.
SiKong Ma House of Nim-Lhach Skeleton Crew. 6	Posted - 2014.12.30 08:37:58 - [35] - Quote +1 to this idea but give all medium and large MWD to do MJD with loaded scripts (retire the MMJD and and LMJD).
Murkar Omaristos The Alabaster Albatross Eternal Pretorian Alliance 45	Posted - 2014.12.30 08:45:14 - [36] - Quote +1 to this......I too think that kitey ships are getting far too OP. There needs to be a trade off of dps vs. range, and for cruiser class ships its slowly trickling away. A well piloted Orthrus is now basically impossible to catch, and can point & alpha small ships from a ridiculous distance.
Mag's the united 18424	Posted - 2014.12.30 08:58:47 - [37] - Quote Came expecting a bad OP with rants etc. Now leaving very surprised and seeing it's actually a good idea. Sir, you have my +1. Great idea. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 620	Posted - 2014.12.30 12:56:06 - [38] - Quote afkalt wrote: Nevyn Auscent wrote: afkalt wrote: Or bake them into the hulls entirely The only time modules should ever be baked into a hull is on a specialist T2 class of hulls. Otherwise baking stuff in is boring and removes diversity of fittings. Well, to a point. Prop mods aren't really 'optional' in 99.99% of cases and it means there's no weird coding needed to stop my 100MN fit stabber MJDing. Actually this could be resolved by making it a script for the jump drives instead. So keep the MJD module AND the MWD modules but make scripts for the jump drives which make them MWD rather than the origianl idea of MWD scripts. This maintains oversized MWDs being usable, still maintains the original idea AND keeps the existing lockout on MJDs - from ABCs, for example.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 521	Posted - 2014.12.30 18:39:52 - [39] - Quote While we are at it, I think 3 minutes is a tad long for the cooldown. What about 2 minutes instead? signature
Mario Putzo Welping and Dunking. 986	Posted - 2014.12.30 19:36:37 - [40] - Quote Biggest detractor to BC and BS atm is proliferation of Bombers. Especially for Shield BC and BS, but Armor variants are not immune. Additionally Warp speeds of these ships are terrible and make them not very fun ships to roam around in. I do like the MWD script idea though turning it to a MJD. But i think there needs to be a lot more help given to BC and BS atm.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Farsaidh's Freeborn 878	Posted - 2014.12.30 20:27:10 - [41] - Quote Perhaps there is room for a scriptable version that isn't as effective as a pure MWD or MMJD (say 350% speed boost and 50Km jump)
Prometheus Exenthal mnemonic. 706	Posted - 2014.12.30 22:51:39 - [42] - Quote Tusker Crazinski wrote: Fist of all I don't see kiting as an issue. ironically the changes you proposed would actually allow BCs for further avoid getting caught, and mitigate and void damage. That's a big part of what they need. BC & BS are very easy to catch & to kill. They are next to suicidal when roaming. They are slow to warp, slow in warp, and slow to lock intercepting targets. masternerdguy wrote: I really like this idea and believe it will improve the game. The script needs a long loading time (60 seconds seems reasonable) to prevent abuse, and should only apply to MWDs. Alternatively, MJDs could be more like an ASB in that it only is a MJD while loaded with a charge it consumes but when not loaded it is a sub-par MWD (massive energy consumption for what you get). I don't think it needs a loading time, since MJD are currently usable whenever you like. Right now, you can be MWDing & activate your MJD. The proposed change wouldn't change the cooldown mechanic of the MJD. You would still be able to use the MWD function, but unable to jump again until the respective timer has elapsed. I don't like the idea of making it a charge-based module, largely because many ships are already extremely tight on cargo capacity (after ammo & cap charges). Adding another burden seems largely unnecessary. The charge would need to be small enough to be useful, but bigger enough to have a purpose. Think of it like carrying a dozen tracking scripts or something for every time you wanted to activate the module. The overall item stack would be tiny and largely self-serving. Furthermore: When I was part of the CSM we pushed to make hybrid ammunition smaller to make room for cap charges. Giving MJDs some sort of sizable charge would somewhat negate that. Sard Caid wrote: two posts worth of stuff The proposed implementation is debatable, so that's why I suggested both kinds. One would remove a module type entirely (MJD modules), whereas the other would transform them into something new (& useful). If the 2nd option were to be selected, I would be okay with the module taking more fitting requirements than that of a standard MWD. I envision said MWD/MJD hybrid module to have significantly more fitting, no cap penalty, and a lower speed bonus / sig penalty (compared to MWDs). I will disagree that the shield ships have it the worst. I will say that they are equally at a disadvantage. Off the top of my head, I can only think of a handful of BC/BS hulls that can get away with dual-prop fits that do no result in a gimp setup. Only 1 of them is a BC hull (Myrm). I think the BS do a lot better overall because they rely less on extreme close range (sub 10km) to apply damage. With that said, most of the current MJD setups result in very poor tackling, tanking, or mobile ability. Murkar Omaristos wrote: On battlecruisers; some of them do need their agility adjusted. However I think it would be important to make sure that tier 3s are well balanced so as to not become super fast kiting ships. Do keep in mind that ABCs (Tier3) cannot use MJD functions, and this proposal would not change that. Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Perhaps there is room for a scriptable version that isn't as effective as a pure MWD or MMJD (say 350% speed boost and 50Km jump) One could also imagine that maybe the hybrid MWD/MJD module could be in addition to the current modules, which could mean it has less speed & less range than independent versions. https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage
letmepost Parmala State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.12.31 00:00:18 - [43] - Quote Confirming BC/BS need more love..... It is skill intensive and really suck in current meta. Making it more agile is a good start.
Caleb Seremshur The Atomic Fallout Kids 442	Posted - 2015.01.01 07:47:12 - [44] - Quote Nevyn Auscent wrote: afkalt wrote: Or bake them into the hulls entirely The only time modules should ever be baked into a hull is on a specialist T2 class of hulls. Otherwise baking stuff in is boring and removes diversity of fittings. You could do a LOT worse than baking in mmjd/lmjd functionality in to the relevant hulls. Just call it a "role bonus" and leave it at that. Join channel Aussies in space to chat with AU/NZ players

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.