EVE Search - [implants] Rebalance slave sets

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

[implants] Rebalance slave sets

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 601	Posted - 2015.05.03 23:08:27 - [1] - Quote Slave sets are one of those thing which everyone knows about, and which have a major shifting influence on the sandbox, but which no one really seems to talk about much. Like many things which have been with us since the early days of eve, they have had an enormous effect on what doctrines and playstyles emerged. The ability for armor tanks to add more than 50% of their base HP in armor without a single concession on the fitting, in a way which scales absolutely with buffer mods, rigs and so on, is far more powerful in the modern eve era than the shield boost bonus that crystal sets give. That this extends to capitals, unlike crystal sets, just tips them further over the line. I think it is time to tone them down. Overall, I would like to see slave sets effectiveness dropped to approximately: HG: 32% MG: 26% LG 18% I would prefer to accomplish this by reducing primarily the per implant set bonus, and slightly reducing the HP bonus on slots 3-5, to 2.5%, 3% and 3.5% respectively. Why: Armor capitals are too tough relative to shield capitals, and this helps even that out. Buffer bonuses are inherently more powerful than rep bonuses with modern fleet sizes for fleet combat. Oversized plates and slave synergize unfortunately well on t3s, HACs and other cruisers with the space for large plates. It makes finding a competitive shield doctrine easier, and I like shield doctrines. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Arthur Aihaken Jormungand Corporation 4421	Posted - 2015.05.03 23:29:52 - [2] - Quote Expect to see a call for a reduction with Crystal implants as well... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Tabyll Altol Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 92	Posted - 2015.05.04 09:22:41 - [3] - Quote If somebody want-¦s to fly a t3 with such an expensive impset you should not be upset, you rather should get the firepower to pod him. Makes a juicy killmail. -1
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2377	Posted - 2015.05.04 09:39:37 - [4] - Quote Tabyll Altol wrote: If somebody want-¦s to fly a t3 with such an expensive impset you should not be upset, you rather should get the firepower to pod him. Makes a juicy killmail. -1 how is that relevant to power balance?
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 602	Posted - 2015.05.04 09:53:23 - [5] - Quote Tabyll Altol wrote: If somebody want-¦s to fly a t3 with such an expensive impset you should not be upset, you rather should get the firepower to pod him. Makes a juicy killmail. -1 I think they are problematic on many other scales. T3 and capitals bring out the worst imbalances with them, but they are so much more effective than crystals, their shield counter-part. In modern fleets, local reps are a joke compared to RR. In modern solo, many people fly armor buffer, so applicable there. Hmm, active armor? More armor HP to chew through, so more time for your reps to catch. Looks like they help almost every application of armor tanking, vs only helping subcap local tanks for crystals, and so to balance the two somewhat, reducing the raw power advantage of slaves is not unreasonable. That said, I like juicy pods, and want to keep being able to find them with slaves in, so I want them to continue to be valuable, without being over powered. How is that for a desire? Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Lugh Crow-Slave 1077	Posted - 2015.05.04 09:57:01 - [6] - Quote Rowells wrote: Tabyll Altol wrote: If somebody want-¦s to fly a t3 with such an expensive impset you should not be upset, you rather should get the firepower to pod him. Makes a juicy killmail. -1 how is that relevant to power balance? what he asked Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
Anthar Thebess 1014	Posted - 2015.05.04 10:34:01 - [7] - Quote Actually other pirate sets should get proper boost to be so viable option like crystal , slave , nomad etc. Implants are actually ok when people are using them , especially when there is free market , and you actually don't need blue list longer than you can remember to get them by yourself ( aka super construction). Yes you could say they bring imbalance , but think from where this imbalance comes, lets take for example 'slaved' armor carrier: - it will have more EHP - it's resistances will not be affected - dps will not change If you have good fleet composition , you can still kill it , it will just take a bit longer. Now when you have 50 ( or more) slowcats on grid first thing you need to consider is not how much EHP have specific ship, but will you be able to brake remote reps. The same applies to subcapital fleet. Currently the biggest imbalance is located in remote reps that specific ship receive. Remember that those sets are quite expensive , and pods are so fragile. Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 658	Posted - 2015.05.04 10:37:04 - [8] - Quote While we are talking implants, may I suggest to the market bots that they lower the pricetag for them 'a tad'? The fellow market-trolls of New Eden may not realize it but I am very observant, wether I talk about it or not and I know that high-grade implants still cost the same as the did 8 years ago. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Rivr Luzade Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 1398	Posted - 2015.05.04 10:48:51 - [9] - Quote Both implant sets are hardly comparable as they function in starkly different setups. Crystals have no use in big fleet fights and are not used in these scenarios. Slaves work well in fleets, but are not used in big fleets, especially not HG or MG, as their cost is prohibitive to the high likelihood of losing your capsule. Slaves on small and medium fleet doctrines like Low sec Sacrileges and Absolutions only work because you cannot lose your capsule. Slaves on caps can be seen as problematic, but as this is only one small group of ships compared to, for instance, where Crystals are very effective (Solo Tengus, Shield Boosting Marauders, Sleipnirs, etc pp.), I don't really see a need to change Slaves. Instead of reducing Slave effects, call for the introduction of a Shield Buffer set and Armor Repair set. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 522	Posted - 2015.05.04 11:07:47 - [10] - Quote To be completely fair to armor users everywhere, shield already gets a base hp buff from just the skills, so having a slave set isn't to unbalanced. It's just the natural outcome from armor boats with hp bonuses or high resists that they gain so much ehp. Slaves just have a tendency to be used on higher-level armor boats simply because they can sport such high natural resists, and it's easier to fit for them than shields are. That said, I do support your idea with reducing their effectiveness. Cruiser and battlecruiser hulls reaching over a half a million ehp is absurd.

Aran Hotchkiss Phoibe Enterprises 82	Posted - 2015.05.04 11:39:40 - [11] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: shield already gets a base hp buff from just the skills, so having a slave set isn't to unbalanced Quote: Hull Upgrades: Skill at maintaining your ship's armor and installing hull upgrades like expanded cargoholds and inertial stabilizers. Grants a 5% bonus to armor hit points per skill level Shamelessly stole this line, Alternatively, QFT One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 988	Posted - 2015.05.04 11:45:26 - [12] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: Both implant sets are hardly comparable as they function in starkly different setups. Crystals have no use in big fleet fights and are not used in these scenarios. Slaves work well in fleets, but are not used in big fleets, especially not HG or MG, as their cost is prohibitive to the high likelihood of losing your capsule. Slaves on small and medium fleet doctrines like Low sec Sacrileges and Absolutions only work because you cannot lose your capsule. Slaves on caps can be seen as problematic, but as this is only one small group of ships compared to, for instance, where Crystals are very effective (Solo Tengus, Shield Boosting Marauders, Sleipnirs, etc pp.), I don't really see a need to change Slaves. Instead of reducing Slave effects, call for the introduction of a Shield Buffer set and Armor Repair set. The issue is that crystals don't work on caps, but slaves for some reason do. Oh please. Dreadnought 0, slowcat 1.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12881	Posted - 2015.05.04 11:57:30 - [13] - Quote You can talk about reducing the buffer advantage of armor tanks when shields stop regenerating on their own. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Shadow of xXDEATHXx 188	Posted - 2015.05.04 12:01:07 - [14] - Quote your first example there is supers... how their ehp gets buffed out of proportion. you know at the present moment, the wyvern has the highest tank and dps combo going. the wyvern DPS fit, has 33.7m ehp. Max tank fit is 39.7m ehp (slaves for giggles pushes 42.7m ehp) a nyx with full tank fit AND SLAVES, has 28.8m ehp add gang links... Wyvern Max DPS 40.8m ehp, Max tank 48.1m ehp (52m ehp with slave) Nyx max tank 35.7m ehp Aeon max tank 52m ehp Dps comparison Wyvern DPS fit, 9894 Aeon tank fit 5600 Nyx Tank fit, 7050 to get similar dps,(approx 9 - 10k) the nyx drops down to 24m ehp the aeon to 31m ehp so please tell me where slave sets are breaking capitals
Minty Aroma Facta.Non.Verba The Obsidian Front 51	Posted - 2015.05.04 13:59:05 - [15] - Quote I'm hoping they'll make an active armour set and a passive shield set. That should equalize things a little. Maybe to make the sets not exactly the same, the armour set could give a boost to repair speed (and corresponding cap reduction) whereas the shield passive set could boost raw hp less than armour but also boosts passive shield regeneration by a sizable amount. Hopefully that would balance the tank types whilst still keeping them unique.
Rivr Luzade Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 1399	Posted - 2015.05.04 14:07:09 - [16] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: The issue is that crystals don't work on caps, but slaves for some reason do. Oh please. Dreadnought 0, slowcat 1. Would be overpowered in Triage/Siege. Station Tab :: UI Improvement Collective
Xequecal GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 285	Posted - 2015.05.04 14:33:05 - [17] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Tabyll Altol wrote: If somebody want-¦s to fly a t3 with such an expensive impset you should not be upset, you rather should get the firepower to pod him. Makes a juicy killmail. -1 I think they are problematic on many other scales. T3 and capitals bring out the worst imbalances with them, but they are so much more effective than crystals, their shield counter-part. In modern fleets, local reps are a joke compared to RR. In modern solo, many people fly armor buffer, so applicable there. Hmm, active armor? More armor HP to chew through, so more time for your reps to catch. Looks like they help almost every application of armor tanking, vs only helping subcap local tanks for crystals, and so to balance the two somewhat, reducing the raw power advantage of slaves is not unreasonable. That said, I like juicy pods, and want to keep being able to find them with slaves in, so I want them to continue to be valuable, without being over powered. How is that for a desire? Shield caps are already much better than armor caps and the main reason armor caps are still being used is inertia. You can't mix doctrines and if you already have 200 armor supercaps, well.....
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 231	Posted - 2015.05.04 14:49:18 - [18] - Quote Just make them crystal clones, jesus. "Armor and shield must be different" should only really apply to subcaps. Its obvious that it just leads to a stupid imbalance at the capital ships level. What do you gain from such an imbalance?
Tyr Dolorem Snuff Box Snuffed Out 49	Posted - 2015.05.04 16:00:27 - [19] - Quote No thanks tia.
Mr Digs Snuff Box Snuffed Out 21	Posted - 2015.05.04 16:01:14 - [20] - Quote Tyr Dolorem wrote: No thanks tia. No Thanks.

Heidi Beldrulf Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.05.04 16:01:49 - [21] - Quote Instead of nerfing things why don't you ask CCP for shield HP implants.
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1264	Posted - 2015.05.04 16:47:37 - [22] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: You can talk about reducing the buffer advantage of armor tanks when shields stop regenerating on their own. Plz. Passive regen is a joke for anything except PvE. Besides, armor has about 6 resistance and buffer options. While half of the shield options are focused on passive regen, and require you to literally sacrifice every slot on your ship except weapons but including dps mods to utilize them. And at least one of those (Shield Flux Coils) is complete trash. And we won't even get into the sigRad bloom from extenders and shield rigs. Armor has so many advantages over shields its not even funny. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
WarFireV Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 413	Posted - 2015.05.04 17:11:10 - [23] - Quote If you want to get into a Shield vs Armor debate, that is really a different topic altogether. As for Slaves? You want to nerf something next to no one uses? why? I mean they might get a little bit more use then most of the implate sets, but not by much. Only armor supers and blinged out carebears use HG slave sets. Shield supers already have more EHP compared to armor even with slave sets so I don't get that argument and most carebears would actually be better off using a different implate set. The only thing that leaves are wormhole people who might use slave sets because most wormholes tend to over bling their T3s and that is about as niche as it can get. Majority of other small gang people who do use implates regularly, use nomad or crystal sets.
Xequecal GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 285	Posted - 2015.05.04 17:20:45 - [24] - Quote Shield supercaps (technically, regular caps do too if you pack deadspace **** on them, but that's not worth it) have more EHP than armor supercaps do even with a full slave set plugged in. I have no idea why anyone is complaining about slaves. An A-type EANM increases your EHP by 54.77%. An A-type invulnerability field increases your EHP by 88.125%, AND you can overload it. Even if for some reason you only have a single hardener on your supercap, you're already getting more EHP than slaves provide by overloading that one hardener.
lord xavier Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel 62	Posted - 2015.05.04 17:21:20 - [25] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Slave sets are one of those thing which everyone knows about, and which have a major shifting influence on the sandbox, but which no one really seems to talk about much. Like many things which have been with us since the early days of eve, they have had an enormous effect on what doctrines and playstyles emerged. The ability for armor tanks to add more than 50% of their base HP in armor without a single concession on the fitting, in a way which scales absolutely with buffer mods, rigs and so on, is far more powerful in the modern eve era than the shield boost bonus that crystal sets give. That this extends to capitals, unlike crystal sets, just tips them further over the line. I think it is time to tone them down. Overall, I would like to see slave sets effectiveness dropped to approximately: HG: 32% MG: 26% LG 18% I would prefer to accomplish this by reducing primarily the per implant set bonus, and slightly reducing the HP bonus on slots 3-5, to 2.5%, 3% and 3.5% respectively. Why: Armor capitals are too tough relative to shield capitals, and this helps even that out. Buffer bonuses are inherently more powerful than rep bonuses with modern fleet sizes for fleet combat. Oversized plates and slave synergize unfortunately well on t3s, HACs and other cruisers with the space for large plates. It makes finding a competitive shield doctrine easier, and I like shield doctrines. Why change an implant set that isnt broken. The only thing broken is how there is not a Shield set to copy what the Slaves do. Which I think they tried to fix a few years back during the HP nerf on supers. Though I am not 100% certain on that. This makes the use of shield capitals less likely do to the less buffer. Especially in regards to crystals being absolutely useless on capital shield boosters that supers already do not use. This is why armor capitals have the advantage over shield as there is not an implant set to mimic the same results. Slaves are also not used in every super. Depending on the use of the capital, other implants tend to prove more useful.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1150	Posted - 2015.05.04 19:30:00 - [26] - Quote Xequecal wrote: Shield supercaps (technically, regular caps do too if you pack deadspace **** on them, but that's not worth it) have more EHP than armor supercaps do even with a full slave set plugged in. I have no idea why anyone is complaining about slaves. An A-type EANM increases your EHP by 54.77%. An A-type invulnerability field increases your EHP by 88.125%, AND you can overload it. Even if for some reason you only have a single hardener on your supercap, you're already getting more EHP than slaves provide by overloading that one hardener. Wouldn't one expect this given it is active vs passive module? That ENAM still works if you're capped out. A better compare would be the passive mods vs passive mods. But perhaps redundant...things are just different.
Mag's the united 19375	Posted - 2015.05.04 19:43:06 - [27] - Quote Sorry but I'm having a hard time agreeing with the OP. I don't see much of an issue with them tbh. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
FireFrenzy Satan's Unicorns 350	Posted - 2015.05.05 10:52:58 - [28] - Quote Baboli you know i like you but i am throughy unconvinced about your central premise... "want to find shield docterines" have you missed the tengu's and ishtars everywhere? I get they make titans rather tanky but a leviathan with a full rack of power diagnostics in the lows has the same redonculous EHP pool as avatars and erebuses... Its amazing how the math works out when you can fit Brick HP in one set of slots and resists in an entirely different set of slots... Now if your case had been something like "slave sets are excellent even on shield boats" then i might have listened to your case but your current series of arguments are thoroughly lacking to (atleast) my examination. And on shieldboats you prolly want sig radius or aligntime anyways, although on titans and supers i see why you'd default to HG slaves all day every day... Also Solo marauders with XL ASB with crystals also seem HILARIOUSLY imba and active tanked hyperions are still hilarious no matter what people say for soloing
Jenshae Chiroptera 1470	Posted - 2015.05.05 11:01:22 - [29] - Quote Rather have a shield and hull bonus set of implants. CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids . High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow Fozzie is treating a symptom.
Zan Shiro Alternative Enterprises 624	Posted - 2015.05.05 14:18:50 - [30] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Rather have a shield and hull bonus set of implants. This. Not much hate for the slaves. not their fault ccp is not expanding the range. For shields To be honest I'd even be open to the caveat of some sig radius hit to these to get them. True passive already hits this hard...whats a few more meters really to sig. if you wanted to be slim and skinny sig wise you'd crystal it with active tank. Hull tanking be an interesting option. Ole boy sees shields melt, thinks aww yeah. Sees armour getting tore up....smells the blood. Then hits the wall of hull hp and goes wtf.....



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,04s, ref 20250806/1226
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

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.