Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Morihei Akachi
Nishida Corporation
160
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 01:03:00 -
[31] - Quote
CCP Delegate Zero wrote:As a reminder the meta module signifiers used for these changes are:
- Restrained: lower penalties on use
Still calling technological equipment "restrained," eh? This doesn't get any more plausible merely by virtue of repetition. I doubt I'll be fitting these.
"Enduring", "restrained" and "ample" as designations for starship components are foreign to the genre of high-tech science fiction and do not belong in Eve Online.
|
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
539
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 01:24:45 -
[32] - Quote
Is there any possibility of releasing 3200mm plates and XL extenders? Battleships need some serious love, and introducing battleship-sized buffer mods would go a long way towards that. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate
539
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 01:27:30 -
[33] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:I'd drop 100mm plates, they're never worth a slot. it's hard enough finding a use for 200mms (and 800mms). instead of fitting a small plate with tank rigs, it's often better and faster to use ACRs and a big plate. small plate gank fits probably will still be bad compared to hull tank fits, because of hull tanks being stupid (capless, omni resist, 0 pg, no penalty buffer tank, just why). so yeah, the high bang:buck of ancillary armour reps, and more recently bulkhead rigs, has gotten me to drop the 200mm plates from all my frigate fits except mwd + plate gang fits. I used to solo with AAR + 200mm plate fits, but swapping the plate for an adaptive nano plating typically improved the total ehp when factoring in the AAR, while also being easier fitting and having no mass increase.
I'm just going to guess that small extenders aren't going to be very useful even with that huge buff. midslots are life. people are armour tanking ships that have 5 mids and 2 lows because webs and ewar are so high value. I hope you guys see that this is bad, rather than celebrating it as some player driven emergent sandbox something something.
those restrained extenders seem to have much more lenient penalties than the restrained plates. currently the armour/shield rigs already add as much or more penalty than the actual plates/extenders. I guess they'll be way more after this. I'd like it if tank rigs were much lower impact, but with less crippling penalties. I agree; the restrained plates should have the lowest mass out of any of them, either more so or tied with certain faction plates (it seems like the fed navy plates are the lightest with this). |
Muon Farstrider
Partial Safety
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 01:41:33 -
[34] - Quote
Ripard Teg wrote:unidenify wrote:Who know, maybe we can see tanky Corax with 2 Small Extender Very few people are going to give up a precious mid to do this. Besides, as it is a MSE Corax has a sig of 78m, a third of most medium guns. It doesn't really need the help and the frigs that might double SSE need it even less.
Problem with the Corax in particular is that the damn thing has what feels like zero PG. You put a full rack of light missiles and a microwarpdrive on it and you're literally at 59/60 PG, even with AWU V. You need a MAPC *and* a current router to get a MSE on one. I'm just a newb, but at least in a non-solo situation I'd consider putting 2x SSE on it since it's not quite as critical to have the full rack of mids on every ship in that case. (Especially because I can make up for the extra module slot by replacing the MAPC with a signal enhancer instead of using a sebo.) It does offer a few options for ships that have the midslots. |
Alexis Nightwish
199
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 01:58:32 -
[35] - Quote
Lochiel wrote:Request to change the naming pattern to Nmm [Restrained|Compact] [Flavor Name] Plates
So that when I search for "200mm Restrained" I get exactly the module I was looking for?
I'd much rather have the size in between the tiericide name and the type of module it is like this: [flavortext] [tiericide name] [size] [shield extender/plates]. Example: Rolled Tungsten Compact 1600mm Plates
This way I can search for all "Compact 1600mm" or all "1600mm Plates" and get what I'm looking for.
Large F-S9 Regolith Compact Shield Extender -á CPU 35 (+1) Really?!
CCP, if your goal is to get people to fit SSE or sub-400mm plates on their frigates, or to encourage people to use medium tank modules on their cruisers, this isn't going to do it. The slots are too precious, and even with the new stats I'd rather have a resist module instead of a small HP module.
Also you're completely missing the chance to fix something that's been broken for a long time: the disparity between armor and shield at larger sizes. What do I mean? Well the go-to HP modules for frigates is the MSE and 400mm. These add around 1000 HP to your ship. Armor a little more, shield a little less but given their inherent balancing factors (mass vs sig radius, higher base resists vs regeneration) this is fine.
Now look at the go-to for everything cruiser and up: LSE and 1600mm. HUGE disparity between their HP. 1600mm armor literally gives 80-90% more HP than LSE! This is a primary factor in why you only see armor in large fleet fights. They give so much HP, and penalize speed so little, and sig radius not at all (I'm not even going to talk about bombers here. I have another thread for that.), and they have better inate resists, that it's the obvious choice.
Another thing you're missing out on is the opportunity to provide more fitting options for shields. Right now you have three shield sizes, and five armor. Why not make five shield sizes as well like so:
-á-á-á-á-á[SIZE]-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á[APPROX HP Sh/Ar]-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á[FITTING RESTRICTIONS] Micro/100mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á400-500/500-600-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for Frigates Small/200mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á600-750/750-900-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for Destroyers, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for Frigates Medium/400mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á800-1000/1000-1200-á-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for Cruisers, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for Destroyers; prohibitive for Frigates Large/800mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á1500-1800/2000-2400-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for BC, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for Cruiser; prohibitive for Destroyer down X-Large/1600mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á2750-3250/4000-5000-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for BS, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for BC; prohibitive for Cruiser down
I know you guys aren't going to look at these modules for years after this. Please take the time to fix them now!
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1058
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 01:59:40 -
[36] - Quote
I like this. Finally pimp has a meaning for buffer mods. Can't you smuggle in a x-large shield extender category? I want to blow BS appropriate amounts of PG and CPU on an extender! |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
702
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 02:15:15 -
[37] - Quote
probag Bear wrote: The dual-plated, dual-ENAM, dual-trimarked, full slave Rapier is literally the only ship fitting that makes use of this module. With your proposed PWG change to the module, you are making impossible roughly all of the ships flown with this module fit. And given the extremely high price of the module, there will be no fit to step up to the plate and make this module worth using again.
tl;dr: Looking at historical market and kill-mail data, by nerfing 'Bailey' 1600mm Steel Plates, you are making the one and only common fit that uses this module impossible, and thus eliminating ~98.5% of the total demand for the module. Given its enormous price and mediocre new stats, there will be no fit on any ship at all that this module will be worth using on. It will go from one of the very few Storyline modules to have a dominant niche to another Storyline module that is never, ever, used.
They are also much in demand for TDF logi in incursions.
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1336
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 02:26:10 -
[38] - Quote
They just improved every frigates tank.
Not bad.
Yaay!!!!
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
702
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 02:26:49 -
[39] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Another thing you're missing out on is the opportunity to provide more fitting options for shields. Right now you have three shield sizes, and five armor. Why not make five shield sizes as well like so:
-á-á-á-á-á[SIZE]-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á[APPROX HP Sh/Ar]-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á[FITTING RESTRICTIONS] Micro/100mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á400-500/500-600-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for Frigates Small/200mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á600-750/750-900-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for Destroyers, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for Frigates Medium/400mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á800-1000/1000-1200-á-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for Cruisers, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for Destroyers; prohibitive for Frigates Large/800mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á1500-1800/2000-2400-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for BC, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for Cruiser; prohibitive for Destroyer down X-Large/1600mm-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á2750-3250/4000-5000-á-á-á-á-á-áPerfect for BS, tight fit/max skills/implants/fitting mods for BC; prohibitive for Cruiser down
I know you guys aren't going to look at these modules for years after this. Please take the time to fix them now!
I kinda like this, and noodled up a slightly different version, which was based off of the ratios between existing modules, which I included in a post inside the battleship balance proposal I'm working on. Important part of this post quoted below
Quote: XL Shield Extender II 6563HP 879PG 63CPU 90Sig And
3200MM plate II 9600HP 1438PG 39CPU 15000000 kg
Talking more,
Flying crazier,
And drinking more
Making battleships worth the warp
|
Midori Tsu
Evolution Northern Coalition.
138
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 03:01:06 -
[40] - Quote
I think the syndicate plates should get another look at, with the proposed changes there will be very little reason to use them over the other the fed navy, especially when you consider the price and availability.
I have yet to see an armor tanked ship that needs the PG so much that it will take an increase in CPU. In any case, if that were an issue the trade off for the fed navy will work just as well and is better as it uses less cpu, 25 pg is not much of an increase. not to mention fed navy adds less mass.
As for price and availability, the fed navy has it beat as well, it comes from FW which just pours out LP. At tier 2 it is a single 10 minute novice plex to get enough LP to buy the plate from the LP store. That's with a T1 frigate. So when you consider how saturated the market will be and how easy it will be to get these to market, these will be easy to get. The syndicate plates will require a minimum of 3 missions in a tengu or battleship. Then you'll have to move it with a jump freighter, cloaky transport or hope to god a good wormhole appears nearby. Not to mention, you'll have to live in syndicate. I don't think we'll see a large availability of these.
So why would i ever want to pay more for something that has 5% less PG and is worse in every other way?
If the syndicate plates had less mass than the fed i think it might be a good trade off. |
|
exiik Shardani
Terpene Conglomerate
28
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 03:15:02 -
[41] - Quote
+ for 200mm and 400mm plates + for faction variants of plates
- for nerf of 800mm and 1600mm tungstens/T2 plates (each -100 HP means -132 / -152 effective HP, because most armor buffer ships use 2 or 3 trimarks)
- it means little nerf to majority fits of Navy Augoror |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2418
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 03:39:37 -
[42] - Quote
I'm still looking at the rest of the numbers, but I definitely want to say that once the whole module tiericide is finished, consolidating the meta levels to be more linear and sensical in regards to module type should definitely happen. |
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
544
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 04:37:53 -
[43] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote:Small shield extenders get double HP over 100mm plates. 200mm plates have roughly same HP but 10PG or more and slows the ship down.
Ships that will be fitting these modules won't prefer either really, just that PG is more valuable on small ships.
200mm plate adds 8% or so more mass to a punisher SSE II adds about 4% more sig radius to a kestrel.
or so. estimates here. Guess it depends on lots of factors. If your concerns are only fitting then 12 power 16 cpu or 26 cpu 3 power actually makes the SSE harder to fit.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
sabastyian
Death By Design Did he say Jump
27
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 04:50:38 -
[44] - Quote
Why the cpu nerf to 1600 t2 plates? Not really crying, just annoyed 95% of my fits will now have to be re-worked into worse variants due to this pointless change. |
Berluth Luthian
Hoplite Brigade
203
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 04:58:00 -
[45] - Quote
Dual SSE > 1 MSE for everything but Cpu |
Inslander Wessette
Killers of Paranoid Souls Universal Paranoia Alliance
20
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 06:00:06 -
[46] - Quote
hmmm...
Both propulsion and hp module changes in same patch . Recalculating speed values .
But...
The CCR plates have the same PG/CPU value as the meta 0 plate . But has better armor and lower penalty. Why would anyone use the meta 0 version ?
SImilarly between Azeotropic and Meta 0 shield extenders.
Or what is the point of the meta 0 module ? Just to be used in production of the T2 variant ? Not as a module as such ?
or have i completely missed some value . Isk may be to some extent but lets agree its not going to be a major factor.
I see clear tierciding between the Meta 1 and Meta 5 module . Increase in all values across the board .
Explain please . |
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
945
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 06:03:28 -
[47] - Quote
I mentioned this in the prop mod thread as well, but it's probably not a good idea for the meta modules to also be improved over T1 in the primary stat. They are already better through their other bonuses (fitting, cap use, etc), also making them better at the primary job (in this case having a better HP bonus) only serves to further undermine the usefulness of T1. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness
204
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 06:05:35 -
[48] - Quote
CCP, this is your chance to discourage the common practice of fitting oversized tank mods. Right now it's a standard approach and only seldom one considers the smaller option. How about making 1600mm plates or L extenders on cruiser sized ships a fitting choice that needs some commitment? Same for frigs with med extenders/ 400mm plates.
Upping the penalties a little more might do the trick. |
Eli Porter
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
10
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 06:13:22 -
[49] - Quote
- Reduce unnecessary complexity
- Provide meaningful options within the module set
- Stealth nerf armor doctrines?
That T2 plate nerf is a big deal. Double plated battleships will be losing like 3-5k EHP before links. |
Aplysia Vejun
The Scope Gallente Federation
23
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 06:30:59 -
[50] - Quote
Midori Tsu wrote:I think the syndicate plates should get another look at, with the proposed changes there will be very little reason to use them over the other the fed navy, especially when you consider the price and availability.
I have yet to see an armor tanked ship that needs the PG so much that it will take an increase in CPU. In any case, if that were an issue the trade off for the fed navy will work just as well and is better as it uses less cpu, 25 pg is not much of an increase. not to mention fed navy adds less mass.
As for price and availability, the fed navy has it beat as well, it comes from FW which just pours out LP. At tier 2 it is a single 10 minute novice plex to get enough LP to buy the plate from the LP store. That's with a T1 frigate. So when you consider how saturated the market will be and how easy it will be to get these to market, these will be easy to get. The syndicate plates will require a minimum of 3 missions in a tengu or battleship. Then you'll have to move it with a jump freighter, cloaky transport or hope to god a good wormhole appears nearby. Not to mention, you'll have to live in syndicate. I don't think we'll see a large availability of these.
So why would i ever want to pay more for something that has 5% less PG and is worse in every other way?
If the syndicate plates had less mass than the fed i think it might be a good trade off. Good post. Why are the navy versions better AND much cheaper at the same time? @ccp
|
|
Rinola Han
First Moon Industries
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 07:18:58 -
[51] - Quote
Just a question, what happens to existing 50mm BPOs? Will they be upgraded to become 100mm BPO? Same questions for T2 BPO.
Thanks. |
Xercodo
Xovoni Directorate
4192
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 07:51:08 -
[52] - Quote
I think that the fitting of the plates and SEs need to reflect their active tanking counter parts.
You need an SSE to be comparable to a small booster to fit, and 1600mm plates should match a LAR.
Additionally, these modules should give benefits that reflect this. I want to see the day where a buffer fit doesnt require 3 plates to be competitive and then STILL need resists on top of that. Likewise goes fro LSEs
This also means that yes, like the other are saying, we need an XLSE to match the booster.
And while we're on the topic you need put a shield recharge penalty on SEs and buff the crap out of shield rechargers to make them worth it. There's no reason to fit a recharger over an SE at all, like ever. You need yo make the shield tankers pick between buffer to passive recharge, not give them both, because it makes them REALLY annoying to kill. They get a cap-free recharge buff to their buffer.
And since we're talking amount over recharge can we get another small buff to cap batteries? They use WAY too much PG and CPU for that tiny neuting defense. They help, but are still generally not worth it. Maybe make their benefits comparable to their SE counter parts?
The Drake is a Lie
|
Brown Pathfinder
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 08:04:54 -
[53] - Quote
Can you guys please make it a little easier to fit in a medium shield extender on mining barges? |
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
196
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 08:14:47 -
[54] - Quote
Brown Pathfinder wrote:Can you guys please make it a little easier to fit in a medium shield extender on mining barges? It is easy. My Proc. fits two of them currently. |
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
984
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 08:20:40 -
[55] - Quote
Can we please abandon this awful new naming convention
It makes everything more wordy and somehow even more ridiculous sounding |
Conjaqq
Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity Get Off My Lawn
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 08:32:01 -
[56] - Quote
Not really sure why tech 2 armor plates, are getting nerfed.
Tech 2 plates where for the longest time, unusable because of rolled tungesten. Recently that was changed to make their fitting a little more easy. Now this seems to be reverted, and ontop of that the bonus it provides has been lessened aswell....
I dont know, maybe it's fine. It just seems odd to me.
|
Khan Wrenth
Hedion University Amarr Empire
151
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 09:19:27 -
[57] - Quote
I must be playing in a very different game than the devs, because I often see armor ships built as shield tankers because you can up your powergrid via lows and increase your EHP to ridiculous levels through large shield extenders in a way you can't get through plates....which is a problem because armor is supposed to buffer better and shield is supposed to rep better.
The current meta is predominantly kitey, and armor plates don't mesh well with that because of the speed loss. To see armor plates getting nerfed and shield getting buffed seems completely backwards to me.
But that's just my experience, maybe this will be good overall in the long run. I'm just not seeing the same need for this as the devs apparently do. Between the speed creep from the prop module tiericide and the armor nerf, it feels like the devs want to push all of us into kiting whether we want to or not. Speed, mobility, kiting are all very powerful attributes that don't need further buffing. They don't need nerfing either, I don't want to imply that they do. But they certainly need no help from the devs when the playerbase already covets all these qualities and uses them quite extensively.
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Vibiana
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
12
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 11:44:11 -
[58] - Quote
Hey devs, pls don't nerf plates! T2 plates are just bad, you make them even worse. We don't need 100mm, we need 3200mm!
SSE: too weak, even frigates go for MSE. We need XLSE, with regen penalty! |
Evi Polevhia
Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade
1017
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 11:50:20 -
[59] - Quote
Vibiana wrote:T2 plates are just bad How? Currently other than mass they are better than any meta plate. Did you miss the patch that was forever ago where they were made better than Meta 4? |
|
CCP Delegate Zero
C C P C C P Alliance
209
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 11:50:53 -
[60] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:So, what will happen to the 50mm reinforced steel plate BPOs and the micro shield extender BPOs?
Good question, the plan is to update the 50mm blueprints to 100mm plate prints. As these are BPOs they will be updated to the equivalent 100mm variants.
There are no micro shield extender blueprints with the exception of the existing storyline module print and that will shift to its new 100mm incarnation.
On the concerns raised about plates, primarily on tech II plates, we will take another look. This will likely involve a change to the respective balance of tech II and storyline plates.
We'll also take another look at the balance within the faction meta groups in light of feedback.
A general point on module tiericide as an aside: one of the main points of the exercise as a whole is to get the large range of modules in the game into a more coherent state that will actually facilitate balancing more frequently as needed in the future.
CCP Delegate Zero | Game Designer | @CCPDelegateZero
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |