EVE Search - [Future] Module Tiericide GÇô Shield Rechargers and Others

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

[Future] Module Tiericide GÇô Shield Rechargers and Others

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 13 post(s)

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 248	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:29:33 - [1] - Quote As part of our continued module tiericide project, we are planning on applying consolidation and balance changes to Shield Rechargers, Shield power Relays, and Shield Flux Coils. Please note there is no definitive time frame for these changes to go out at the moment. The general principles behind module tiericide are as follows: Goals of Module Tiericide Reduce unnecessary complexity Provide meaningful options within the module set Structural Changes Consolidate 'Named' modules from meta levels 1-4 into two variants within meta level 1 - a 'compact' variant and a 'restrained' variant Maintain the general positioning and power level of Tech II variants in the families Place 'Storyline' variants in a place that is somewhere between the 'compact' and Tech II variants in terms of relevant stats Bring the power level of Shield Flux Coils up closer to the power of Shield Power Relays. Add new Faction variants to increase meaningful options tied to ISK price Notes Naming Signifiers GÇô The modifiers used by this set of modules are Compact (lower fitting requirements) and Restrained (lower penalties) Flux Coil Recharge Rates GÇô Because Shield Flux Coils reduce your overall Shield amount, the calculations for their actual shield recharge rate are slightly more complicated. The actual recharge rates have been listed as additional information beside the modules stats. Proposed Module Changes Shield Rechargers Shield Rechargers - Tiericide Spreadsheet Shield Power Relays Shield Power Relays - Tiericide Spreadsheet Shield Flux Coils Shield Flux Coils - Tiericide Spreadsheet Release Plan As previously stated, these changes have no current release plan. They are unlikely to be released in the Aegis release in July, but are more likely to come out in the release after that. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Valkin Mordirc 1129	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:34:26 - [2] - Quote WOO FIRST PLACE `#DeleteTheWeak`
Kenrailae Fallen Reich 370	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:35:46 - [3] - Quote Y not sticky? The Law is a point of View
Tiddle Jr Galvanized Inc. 245	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:40:58 - [4] - Quote 3rd one Please fix Armor reps/Shield Boosters/Hull reps next
Nagarythe Tinurandir Cataclysm Enterprises Pandemic Legion 212	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:44:50 - [5] - Quote Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line.
Aebe Amraen Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 140	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:49:53 - [6] - Quote New faction shield mods. Interesting.
Vic Vorlon Aideron Robotics 26	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:52:00 - [7] - Quote @Nagarythe, the advantage with T1 modules is that you can manufacture them yourself. For some circumstances, that's enough of a benefit. If you want better modules (the meta ones) you have to go ratting or go shopping.
Kenrailae Fallen Reich 370	Posted - 2015.06.19 13:56:06 - [8] - Quote Yay ish sticky now! But seriously, can we cut the crap with all this stalling and do t3's and sentries?? Nothing can be really balanced while t3's and sentries are so broken. Really this is all wasted effort until the real problems are fixed. Hint: shield recharges are not the major issue. The Law is a point of View
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1097	Posted - 2015.06.19 14:13:05 - [9] - Quote god, can you get to the actual relevant modules like turrets, tackle mods, ewar? who actually cares about these. or forget the whole thing and do some ship rebalancing, stuff that'll actually fix the game.
Aeon Veritas Lobach Inc. Easily Offended 7	Posted - 2015.06.19 14:17:53 - [10] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Consolidate 'Named' modules from meta levels 1-4 into two variants within meta level 1 - a 'compact' variant and a 'restrained' variant And again I want to ask why they are all changed to meta level 1? Do you have any plans for the meta levels 2-4? If not, please consider to distribute the variants across them, like "Compact" = Meta 1, "Restrained" = Meta 2 and so on... This would make it easier to filter the inventory for the different mods. General module tiericide thoughts


CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 250	Posted - 2015.06.19 15:34:20 - [11] - Quote Aeon Veritas wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: Consolidate 'Named' modules from meta levels 1-4 into two variants within meta level 1 - a 'compact' variant and a 'restrained' variant And again I want to ask why they are all changed to meta level 1? Do you have any plans for the meta levels 2-4? If not, please consider to distribute the variants across them, like "Compact" = Meta 1, "Restrained" = Meta 2 and so on... This would make it easier to filter the inventory for the different mods. Once the module tiericide project is complete, it is very likely we will rework meta levels to remove the gaps. Until then we feel leaving the gaps is a better option than having two systems working simultaneously. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1845	Posted - 2015.06.19 15:34:57 - [12] - Quote Shield rechargers need a massive boost! I'm surprised you've missed that one . They are competing with EM wards, Shield extenders, Invulns... There is little reason to fit them on passive tanked ships. Please reconsider their stats Shield Power Relays stats seem fine to me. Shield Flux Coils, I was expecting a massive boost as well, reduction of shield capacity is so opposed to passive shield tanking efficiency that there is currently no use for these modules. Not with such stats. You should buff them quite extensively, or swap their penalty for something else perhaps? Maybe more sig radius? Or less total Capacitor? Or less Powergrid? Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Tonrak awesomesauce Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity Get Off My Lawn 0	Posted - 2015.06.19 16:39:28 - [13] - Quote Shield power relay and shield Flux coils still seems pretty underwhelming. They are hardly used in any fits, and probably still won't .
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems 152	Posted - 2015.06.19 17:17:08 - [14] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. Pretty much my main comment on all of these rebalancing threads. T1 justice
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2084	Posted - 2015.06.19 17:24:10 - [15] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. dont really agree t1 is for t2 production if you ask me... though if it were up to me... i would have t2 meta versions... that would really make things interesting. Think about a tech II 425 compressed coil gun... almost takes no cap to use but has 80% damage of regular tech II 425 There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 92	Posted - 2015.06.19 17:50:07 - [16] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: dont really agree t1 is for t2 production if you ask me... Yes in nearly all cases the only use for a T1 module is to be used in T2 manufacture. It would have been nice if there had been at least some reason to use them; for instance make them the compact version. Although I'll live with the status quo and just continue to view them as components for manufacture.
Nikuno Atomic Heroes The G0dfathers 202	Posted - 2015.06.19 17:58:44 - [17] - Quote If the figures are correct for %shield per second more then the flux coils are all far too similar. The decision then comes down to fitting or raw hp to survive alpha, in which case only the basic is worth considering. The idea of tiericide is to create more viable choices, this time round you seem to have squashed them all from the current 'only T2 is worthwhile, to 'only cosmos basic is worthwhile'.
Valterra Craven 583	Posted - 2015.06.19 18:48:37 - [18] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: As part of our continued module tiericide project, we are planning on applying consolidation and balance changes to Shield Rechargers, Shield Power Relays, and Shield Flux Coils. Please note there is no definitive time frame for these changes to go out at the moment. The general principles behind module tiericide are as follows: Add new Faction variants to increase meaningful options tied to ISK price I think you guys need to work on this a bit. Faction variants that are tied to one source typically mean that premiums are paid above and beyond what makes logical sense for the benefit compared to other modules that have multiple faction variants. I think each module should have at least one pirate and one navy variant, with the possibility of several of each. Granted, I also think dead space variants should be added as well.
Sleepaz Den Artificial Memories 0	Posted - 2015.06.19 18:52:41 - [19] - Quote Passive recharge is really a good argument if the range 20-40% of max shields is big enough that individual volleys can't punch you through there. Shield flux coils sorta help massively with that, from the aggressor's POV. In pvp, a battlecruiser's+ volley (or a set of heavy drones) easily is 2k upwards. In pve, many sites got sentries dealing massive blasts on warp-in and then every so often afterwards. Since your recharge tank only kicks in at low shields, sentries or low-RoF missile-heavy ships present disqualify flux coils more often than not. If the Flux Coil Shield-HP penalty would be stacking penalized like a CPR's shield boost malus, that'd help a lot and maybe could even make for more agreeable recharge fits that, while more susceptible to ganks, could use MWDs in sites or do multiple longer warps in rapid succession.
Trancefo Delcroix Cosmic Origin 0	Posted - 2015.06.19 18:54:21 - [20] - Quote Nikuno wrote: If the figures are correct for %shield per second more then the flux coils are all far too similar. The decision then comes down to fitting or raw hp to survive alpha, in which case only the basic is worth considering. The idea of tiericide is to create more viable choices, this time round you seem to have squashed them all from the current 'only T2 is worthwhile, to 'only cosmos basic is worthwhile'. First: Good work on the rechargers and power relays! Second: Flux coils are totally of balance. You calculated recharge gain and balanced only with that in mind. Tech II would now work 24,3% more effective for recharge while it takes 150% more CPU and has 200% more HP-drawback than basic making it utter crap compared to it. I suggest: CPU Recharge HP %Shield T1 20 25 -15 13,3 Mark I 15 27 -15 16,4 (with low fitting) Type-D 20 23 -10 16,9 (with high HP) T2 25 30 -15 21,4 Basic 10 20 -10 12,5 (with low fitting and high HP) Guristas 25 31 -15 23,2 (This leaves mark I the best at low fitting, type-D the best against alpha, Basic stays the "small" flux and T2 and guristas now have a meaningfull boost to recharge at expense of HP and fitting)

Ix Method Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 459	Posted - 2015.06.19 19:16:23 - [21] - Quote So do Shield Rechargers actually get used in decent numbers? Was expecting a mahoosive buff to make them worthwhile. Travelling at the speed of love.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 311	Posted - 2015.06.19 20:50:54 - [22] - Quote Shield power relays are already quite strong, don't think they need a buff.
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 2241	Posted - 2015.06.19 21:39:33 - [23] - Quote Out of interest, how do you prioritise the groups? Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Desiderya Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 1011	Posted - 2015.06.19 22:50:19 - [24] - Quote Shield Flux Coils are already kinda questionable in their worth. The proposed changes don't seem to be able to change anything in that regard. On top of that the t2 version seems oddly placed with basically no feelable advantage over the compact/restrained choice. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise.
Sean Parisi Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T 696	Posted - 2015.06.20 00:31:18 - [25] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: god, can you get to the actual relevant modules like turrets, tackle mods, ewar? who actually cares about these. or forget the whole thing and do some ship rebalancing, stuff that'll actually fix the game. Oh man. Don't get me excited. I hope when they do tackle they do alot of different variants with longer range, cap use, cheap cap use, ease of fitting etc. (ex a 30% web with twice the range or something) One can only dream.
Sean Parisi Fugutive Task Force A T O N E M E N T 696	Posted - 2015.06.20 00:34:34 - [26] - Quote Altrue wrote: Shield rechargers need a massive boost! I'm surprised you've missed that one . They are competing with EM wards, Shield extenders, Invulns... There is little reason to fit them on passive tanked ships. Please reconsider their stats Shield Power Relays stats seem fine to me. Shield Flux Coils, I was expecting a massive boost as well, reduction of shield capacity is so opposed to passive shield tanking that there is currently no use for these modules. Not with such stats. You should buff them quite extensively, or swap their penalty for something else perhaps? Maybe more sig radius? Or less total Capacitor? Or less Powergrid? But something needs to change. Suggestion: What about a module that modifies the curve of shield regeneration to have the optimal regeneration start earlier and last longer? That would definitely be a nice addition to Shield Flux Coils or Shield Rechargers. Also this. +1 Supported - Sorry if I double posted.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2543	Posted - 2015.06.20 00:38:27 - [27] - Quote Zappity wrote: Out of interest, how do you prioritise the groups? Dartboard

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 253	Posted - 2015.06.20 01:52:43 - [28] - Quote Rowells wrote: Zappity wrote: Out of interest, how do you prioritise the groups? Dartboard Definitely dartboard @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Rob Kashuken Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 79	Posted - 2015.06.20 01:54:58 - [29] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. I don't mind meta items being better than T1, I do have issue with meta items being better than T2 (most ewar modules).
Neugeniko Insight Securities 63	Posted - 2015.06.20 03:05:43 - [30] - Quote Hi, Shield Power Relays and Shield Flux Coils look good. The shield recharger competes with a Invul most equivalently (provides omni tank). Make it so the recharger is better than a third invul. Say 5% better regen than with a third invul. So the trade off is approx 5% better regen and 14 less cpu for 20% more ehp and 3 cap per sec. Cheers, Neug Indices/Mining Simulator V4.00 UPDATED* Daily Forge Mineral Sales Summary V1.3 Neug's Prime Industrial Real Estate V1.3

Destoya Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 426	Posted - 2015.06.20 07:04:05 - [31] - Quote All of these mods suck and as such will never be used. I think you guys missed an opportunity here; passive shield tanking isnt exactly the most riveting gameplay design but it would be at least nice if shield rechargers and flux coils could shake their current status as unfittable modules. Modules this bad just doesn't need to exist, either change the module or just get rid of it altogether. Could do something interesting like give flux coils a shield HP bonus at the cost of fitting/heat damage/cap/etc to give a module that provides more raw HP than a power diag at the cost of other stats.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1122	Posted - 2015.06.20 07:24:37 - [32] - Quote Shield flux coils and shield rechargers are basically useless. Something should be done about that. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Dino Zavr Shadow Owls 31	Posted - 2015.06.20 11:04:23 - [33] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Aeon Veritas wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: Consolidate 'Named' modules from meta levels 1-4 into two variants within meta level 1 - a 'compact' variant and a 'restrained' variant And again I want to ask why they are all changed to meta level 1? Do you have any plans for the meta levels 2-4? If not, please consider to distribute the variants across them, like "Compact" = Meta 1, "Restrained" = Meta 2 and so on... This would make it easier to filter the inventory for the different mods. Once the module tiericide project is complete, it is very likely we will rework meta levels to remove the gaps. Until then we feel leaving the gaps is a better option than having two systems working simultaneously. In this scenario all stocks of Meta4 deposited modules shall automatically be converted into Meta1 Afterward they will NOT be promoted to higher meta. Not that I am complaining but this gimmick looks like a tiny robbery :)
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2453	Posted - 2015.06.20 13:00:27 - [34] - Quote I passive tank PVP fits a lot. My three current favorite fits for passive tanking in PVP are; Passive Svipul [Svipul, Passive] Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Medium Shield Extender II Warp Disruptor II [Empty Med slot] 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive 200mm AutoCannon II 200mm AutoCannon II 200mm AutoCannon II 200mm AutoCannon II Small Diminishing Power System Drain I Small Diminishing Power System Drain I Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II Small Core Defense Field Extender II [Jackdaw, Passdaw] Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I, Tracking Speed Disruption Script 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive EM Ward Amplifier II Republic Fleet Medium Shield Extender Warp Disruptor II Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile [Empty High slot] Small Core Defense Field Purger II Small Core Defense Field Purger II Small Core Defense Field Purger II [Nereus, Shortcat] Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Damage Control II Shield Power Relay II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Stasis Webifier II Warp Scrambler II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Small Diminishing Power System Drain I 200mm AutoCannon II Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Purger I Warrior II x3 Hornet EC-300 x3 The tanking numbers, from the top; Svipul - 140 DPS tank Jackdaw - 252 DPS tank Nereus 'Shortcat' - 458 DPS tank In none of those fits does either a shield recharger do anything to improve tank. Nominally the passive Jackdaw benefits by 50 HP per second in passive tank, but it loses so much raw EHP you end up unable to tank much anyway. This is because even a weak hit will dip you below your passive recharge peak and you don't recover, so passive tanking requires actual buffer. This is why shield flux coils are unused; yes you gain % recharge but by losing your shield hitpoints you end up basically back in the same position in reality. I mean, the results of PYFA and EFT theorycraft are sustained by real world testing of fits in the game - you suffer if you use SFC's and not SPR's. Flux coils are only distinguished from SPR's by the lack of cap penalty. For example, if you replace the SPRs in the Shortcat with SFC's your tank goes from 458 DPS to 332 DPS. Yes, you have better cap stability, but that's irrelevant mostly. You can claw some of that back by going full purger rigs but it's still not useful. Yes, you are cap stable, but you can still run a point using a small Nosferatu - after all very low capacitor levels caused by SPR's recharge quite fast, and the Nos cycles faster than a web, point, invul, so you can sustain tank and point long enough to be efficient bait. That's what passive fits are used for - bait, in PVp, or just for low-DPS ratting fits. What is needed in a rebalance of shield buff modules is dispensing with the current three option which are; rechargers - % buff to shield recharge rate power relays = capacitor penalty and recharge rate buff flux coils = hitpoint penalty and recharge bonus also, the Power Diagnostic is also of note; shield capacity and shield recharge and capacitor amount and recharge bonus (4 positives) thereafter, the rig options for passive tanking are; purger rigs = recharge bonus and sig penalty extender rigs = hitpoint bonus and sig penalty What is needed is a rationalisation of these three modules into two. They are all focused around recharge rate. For passive tanking, you need a large pool of shield hitpoints and a short time to recharge them. eg; 10,000 raw hitpoints recharging over 600 seconds = 16 raw HP/sec 10,000 raw hitpoints recharging over 300 seconds = 32hp/s if you put on an SFC and the rate goes up 20% but the hitpoints go down 15%, you aren't much better off. 10,000 @ 600s = 16hp/s 8,500 @ 480s = 17.7 hp/s = 10% net benefit but lower EHP. Iterate that two times more, for 4 SFC's you get to 6141 hp @ 300s = 20hp/s Or you go SPR's, and the rate goes up but the hitpoints remain stable, so you get to 10,000 @ 300s = 33.3 hp/s. So you can see why SFC's suck and SPR's are the way to go. I mean, why tiercide SFC's at all? Therefore the modules to help passive tanking should be; midslots: shield rechargers which reduce shield recharge time (ie; recharge the shield hitpoint pool faster) lowslot flux coil which buffs recharge time shield power relays which could be an active module, which swaps capacitor recharge into shield recharge when active. ie; if you recharge 20 capacitor per second the power relay takes some of this capacitor and converts it into shield hitpoints in a constant fashion. For example, a SPR Tech 1 would convert 50% of capacitor regen into shield hitpoints. A T2 converts 75%. This could be stacking penalised such that four SPR's would result in 90% or 95% or 99% efficiency at converting cap into shield. This would create an interesting mechanic in tradeoffs - you could use a capacitor battery and CCC's to up your cap regen rate to provide power to your SPR's. You could active cap inject to provide juice for your SPR's. Your passive energy -> shield conversion could be disrupted by neuting. You aare sacrificing DPS for this, of course, since it's a lowslot module. Has CCP considered this kind of module? it would be an interesting mechanism for a fairly predictable set of fits - drake, Shortcat, Svipul, jackdaw and Rattler. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2907	Posted - 2015.06.20 13:30:32 - [35] - Quote TBH I would rather see Shield Flux Coils work opposite to how they work currently. They would nerf your recharge rate but increase your buffer amount. Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
Victor Emmanuel Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective 5	Posted - 2015.06.20 15:44:07 - [36] - Quote Altrue wrote: Shield rechargers Suggestion: What about a module that modifies the curve of shield regeneration to have the optimal regeneration start earlier and last longer? That would definitely be a nice addition to Shield Flux Coils or Shield Rechargers. This ^^
HeXxploiT Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn 158	Posted - 2015.06.20 17:46:35 - [37] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: The general principles behind module tiericide are as follows: Provide meaningful options within the module set I have often thought that it would be nice if passive shield recharge were buffed slightly. I think the only passive recharge tanked ship in the game that pilots fly frequently is the rattlesnake thanks to it's hansom bonus to shield recharge rate. Would be nice to see it brought up to spec to where it could compete with shield boosting and thereby gave more options to consider for shield fits.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 11458	Posted - 2015.06.20 17:59:27 - [38] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: TBH I would rather see Shield Flux Coils work opposite to how they work currently. They would nerf your recharge rate but increase your buffer amount. this
Deacon Abox Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 509	Posted - 2015.06.20 18:06:50 - [39] - Quote Ab'del Abu wrote: Shield power relays are already quite strong, don't think they need a buff. This. Why are you increasing the strength of SPRs? Passive shield regen is already a bit ridiculous on certain ships, and always has been. CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
Yazzinra Scorpion Ventures 74	Posted - 2015.06.20 19:31:06 - [40] - Quote How about y'all finish ship teiricide. Just another incomplete feature from CCP.

Falin Whalen GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 785	Posted - 2015.06.20 19:38:47 - [41] - Quote Shield flux coils. The best use for them is to still melt them down, and use the minerals to build something useful. EDIT: SPRs out recharge SFCs WITHOUT 15% taken from your primary tank. "it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka-á
HeXxploiT Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn 159	Posted - 2015.06.20 23:42:51 - [42] - Quote Yazzinra wrote: How about y'all finish ship teiricide. Just another incomplete feature from CCP. Logic would dictate having a level base module set before modifying ships. Anyway the module tiericide has been going splendidly and once completed it will be easier for the devs to balance ships having their module formula in place and not so chaotic.
James Baboli Novablasters 898	Posted - 2015.06.21 02:02:58 - [43] - Quote HeXxploiT wrote: Yazzinra wrote: How about y'all finish ship teiricide. Just another incomplete feature from CCP. Logic would dictate having a level base module set before modifying ships. Anyway the module tiericide has been going splendidly and once completed it will be easier for the devs to balance ships having their module formula in place and not so chaotic. Especially with the ships left to rebalance having either very dedicated communities built around them (BLOPS) or built around building them (T3s) or are niche by design (many of the remaining t2 classes, like EAFs). All of these are very subject to major changes in how the modules they use are balance as they are usually razor edge on one or more resource of the fit (PG, CPU, Cap) to make them work properly. As such, I am not gonna get my jimmies rustled about various ships languishing so long as CCP acknowledges they are being watched, makes changes at a reasonable rate (every other or every third release is enough for me on the things which are getting filed down, rather than a mallet or spackle) etc. As for these modules, I can't say I'm much impressed with the scale of buffs. they are still all extremely niche at best, and SFCs are probably just a tiny bit better than an empty slot now. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Orca Platypus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2015.06.21 05:33:27 - [44] - Quote If those stats are final, chance to make those mods useful is completely wasted. Shield power relays remain pretty much the only shield tanking low slots, thus they at least have their niche. Flux coils suck. Rechargers suck.
Arthur Aihaken Jormungand Corporation 4458	Posted - 2015.06.21 07:58:56 - [45] - Quote Instead of a shield HP reduction for shield flux coils, why not reduce either armor or hull by the same corresponding amount? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1429	Posted - 2015.06.21 08:20:16 - [46] - Quote I don't think I've ever found a fit where an extender wasn't better than a recharger. And flux coils....lolwut? It's like they were made as if regen value wasn't tied to total capacity but a flat value per hull.
Haatakan Reppola Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 40	Posted - 2015.06.21 10:18:00 - [47] - Quote Some stacking "penalty" on the negative aspects of these modules would go a long way. As far as i can tell there is no stacking penalty on any of these modules.
Alexis Nightwish 250	Posted - 2015.06.21 15:06:38 - [48] - Quote Current stats: [Rattlesnake, SPRII] Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Shield Power Relay II Large Core Defense Field Purger II Large Core Defense Field Purger II Large Core Defense Field Purger II 56k EHP 451 DPS tank (this will go up slightly in Aegis) [Rattlesnake, SFCII] Shield Flux Coil II Shield Flux Coil II Shield Flux Coil II Shield Flux Coil II Shield Flux Coil II Shield Flux Coil II Large Core Defense Field Purger II Large Core Defense Field Purger II Large Core Defense Field Purger II 39k EHP 278 DPS tank So who in their right mind would ever use flux coils? No one does now, and no one will after. The shield HP penalty of the flux coils is too damn high to ever justify their use. Just delete flux coils from the game. That would fit in with the stated goals: "Reduce unnecessary complexity" by removing modules that ironically cripple your ship rather than help it. I remember as a newbie trying to understand the point of flux coils. It wasn't until years later that I realized there is none. "Provide meaningful options within the module set" by removing a meaningless set of modules from the game. Oh and before you tell me that the advantage of flux coils is that they don't penalize the capacitor like SPRs do, let me tell you that the only ships that ever go full passive shield regen are PvE ships that don't need cap like the Rattle, Gila, Scorp Navy, etc. CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button Fixing bombs, not the bombers
James Baboli Novablasters 900	Posted - 2015.06.21 15:16:30 - [49] - Quote Orca Platypus wrote: If those stats are final, chance to make those mods useful is completely wasted. Shield power relays remain pretty much the only shield tanking low slots, thus they at least have their niche. Flux coils suck. Rechargers suck. Power diagnositic system. Shield amount and recharge. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
James Baboli Novablasters 900	Posted - 2015.06.21 15:17:44 - [50] - Quote afkalt wrote: I don't think I've ever found a fit where an extender wasn't better than a recharger. And flux coils....lolwut? It's like they were made as if regen value wasn't tied to total capacity but a flat value per hull. Where you can't fit an extender? Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp

McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 804	Posted - 2015.06.21 16:38:46 - [51] - Quote I thought tiericide was meant to add meaningful choices. It's mostly stripped away choices so far. All modules have various stats associated with them. Stats such as PG, CPU, cycle time, capacitor use, etc. The concept for adding meaningful choices should be based around the understanding that different scenarios optimize the usefulness of certain stats over others. - Meta 0 modules get base (b) for all stats. - Meta 1-4 modules get one or two stats at b+x, the rest of their stats at b-y. - T2 modules get b+z for all stats, where z is less than x, but cost more, require more training to fit, and in some cases use more fitting. - Faction and deadspace module balance so far has been good, not much to change there. It won't work perfect for every module group but as a general theme this is the way to go. The theme right now of removing all the choices, putting one version with less fitting and another with less cap, and calling that tiericide is underwhelming. There are all our dominion Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1429	Posted - 2015.06.21 16:40:45 - [52] - Quote James Baboli wrote: afkalt wrote: I don't think I've ever found a fit where an extender wasn't better than a recharger. And flux coils....lolwut? It's like they were made as if regen value wasn't tied to total capacity but a flat value per hull. Where you can't fit an extender? Perhaps should have said extender/hardener. They're a waste of a slot.

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 262	Posted - 2015.06.22 02:10:19 - [53] - Quote Regarding Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers, I'll make sure to bring up some of the points and ideas made in this thread the next time we have a module tiericide meeting. There's always potential for changes at this stage. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Ranamar Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind 89	Posted - 2015.06.22 04:04:13 - [54] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Regarding Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers, I'll make sure to bring up some of the points and ideas made in this thread the next time we have a module tiericide meeting. There's always potential for changes at this stage. I think you're already thinking of this, but I basically have two questions, one essentially a follow-on from the other. 1) Are you looking to change the desirability of using shield recharge modules during this tiericide pass? 2) What do you think of the current state of shield recharge modules? (Relatedly, when do you think they should be a strong consideration? We can give feedback on what's missing then.) I'm not really sure what I think of them, but I basically never use them, either.
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2455	Posted - 2015.06.22 04:23:48 - [55] - Quote Thanks, CCP Terminus. As Alexis nightwish said above, these modules have limited (rechargers) to no practicable use (flux coils). It is clear CCP has the will and ability to put module types in the game and try things out, c.f. Target Spectrum Breaker, the new missile guidance computers. Likewise, you should be capable and willing to admit that the idea of flux coils is good, but the practical use is next to nil because it is one of the few modules which basically works against itself. I mean, there's no armour module which increases resistance but reduces hitpoints. Granted it's not a direct comparison, due to shield recharge being what it is, and there's no passive recharge of armour, but regardless there's almost no modules in the game which have self-defeating negatives. So, if you're willing to at least discuss changing the module's mechanism, if you remove the hitpoint penalty it becomes a better version of the SPR due to having no cap penalty. if you reduce the hitpoint penalty it would need to be balanced against the SPR and Recharger. The Flux Coil has to have a clear benefit versus either of these modules and versus other options for tanking. eg, a recharger competes with the SPR (which is more efficient at % recharge but has an unrelated drawback) and with resist modules, which are more effective for tanking because they increase EHP not just recharge. It also competes with extenders if you have the spare PG. its only real use is in PG constrained battleship fits, because every other ship either needs buffer (eg, frigates) or has the spare CPU to fit resists. Assume you have 10,000 raw hitpoints and 600s recharge, with 0% across the board resists, and are deciding on an invul field (eg; 30% resist bonus for simplicity's sakes) or a recharger with 15% resist bonus. The passive tank raw is 16 hp/s. With 30% resists the effective hitpoint tank goes to 20.8. 15% recharge bonus goes to 19.6. Therefore you will choose better resists to give a better EHP tank with a lower raw tank, and not choose shield rechargers. Ergo, to passive tank, you fill your lows with SPR's and deal with the capacitor problems (unneeded with Drakes, Rattlers, etc, and as we know no one ever passive shield tanks any laser boats). So, comparing the T2 modules; Recharger II = 15% Shield Power Relay = 25% Flux Coil II = 30% If you remove the shield hitpoint penalty for the flux coil, it invalidates the SPR. If you remove the cap penalty of the SPR, likewise, it becomes even moreso the module of choice. So the only real option with the flux coil is to either reduce the shield hitpoint penalty so that the nett effect is equal with the SPR so that thereby the tradeoff is, i guess, do you lose capacitor with the SPR or buffer with the flux coil? But if you consider the effect of midslots, you'd never, ever choose the flux coil anyway because as shown above, you can add resists to make any given pool of hitpoints more effective. In other words, why trade off capacitor for buffer when you can keep the buffer and use midslots to add even MORE buffer and MORE resists? So, yeah, to my mind the choices with the flux coil are to redesign the mechanism of its operation entirely, or remove it entirely because it is demonstrated that it cannot be modified to become useful and not a redundant variation of the SPR anyway. The whole idea of passive shield tanking is to add buffer, then resists, then recharge, capacitor be damned i'm using capless weapons or drones. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.06.22 05:01:37 - [56] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Regarding Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers, I'll make sure to bring up some of the points and ideas made in this thread the next time we have a module tiericide meeting. There's always potential for changes at this stage. Might I suggest flipping the two stats so that flux coils are a buffer extender with a reduction to recharge rate? ASB tankers would like a low slot buffer extension module and don't particularly care to much about their recharge when they're feeding their tank with charges. As for Mid slot rechargers, Just take into consideration the modules they're competing against.... I am considering fitting a mid slot recharger... oh wait, i'd rather fit... Shield extenders ASB's Cap boosters second prop Invulns damage hole plugs scrams/disruptors E-war Tracking computers/MGE's/Omni-directionals PWNAGE webs Sensor boosters I'm not sure what can be changed about rechargers to make them considerable for fitting against the massive list of better alternatives without making them OP. Perhaps an active module with a 50% recharge reduction but the cap use of an Invuln? Neutable, and burnable with overheat to raise it to 65% recharge reduction... That may be op on rattlesnakes with 2/3 extenders... IDK, they don't seem like they can be balanced... just remove them then?
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 203	Posted - 2015.06.22 05:36:25 - [57] - Quote At what point does the stacking penalty on Invuln's make a Recharger more effective? I'm taking a guess that 2x Inv + 1x Recharger gives you a marginally higher DPS than 2x Inv.
Barrogh Habalu Forever Winter Absolute Zero. 869	Posted - 2015.06.22 06:29:31 - [58] - Quote As a concept, coils were supposed to give some more sustained HPpS than relays at the expense of alpha resistance. Sounds like something you'd fit on traditional PvE boat. IMO it can work, but they need to be buffed considerably. Shield rechargers and relays are pretty much blood raiders grinding mods as well, I really doubt there's a good use of them outside of traditional PvE against heavy neuting.
Janeway84 Def Squadron Pride Before Fall 171	Posted - 2015.06.22 08:25:11 - [59] - Quote Its great that you keep the module tiericide train going! Im sure you guys can handle both ship and module tiericide work at the same time. Flux coils are very bad compared to other options, they need some serious tweaks or like someone suggested deleted from the game. Maybe you can trade off armor hp for recharge? Since they are a low slot mod. Shield rechargers are also less useful but not as bad as flux coils from my own experience. Thing is shield rechargers are using a mid slot wich most players w most ships find other modules that are more needed to fit there, I liked the idea someone had of making it a active module like invul field and giving it a higher recharge. SPR's seem like they are in a good place imo, would perhaps be fun to see a few navy / faction variants for each of the module types so they are in line with other modules in the game.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1429	Posted - 2015.06.22 09:35:57 - [60] - Quote Trinkets friend wrote: Thanks, CCP Terminus. As Alexis nightwish said above, these modules have limited (rechargers) to no practicable use (flux coils). It is clear CCP has the will and ability to put module types in the game and try things out, c.f. Target Spectrum Breaker, the new missile guidance computers. Likewise, you should be capable and willing to admit that the idea of flux coils is good, but the practical use is next to nil because it is one of the few modules which basically works against itself. I mean, there's no armour module which increases resistance but reduces hitpoints. Granted it's not a direct comparison, due to shield recharge being what it is, and there's no passive recharge of armour, but regardless there's almost no modules in the game which have self-defeating negatives. So, if you're willing to at least discuss changing the module's mechanism, if you remove the hitpoint penalty it becomes a better version of the SPR due to having no cap penalty. if you reduce the hitpoint penalty it would need to be balanced against the SPR and Recharger. The Flux Coil has to have a clear benefit versus either of these modules and versus other options for tanking. eg, a recharger competes with the SPR (which is more efficient at % recharge but has an unrelated drawback) and with resist modules, which are more effective for tanking because they increase EHP not just recharge. It also competes with extenders if you have the spare PG. its only real use is in PG constrained battleship fits, because every other ship either needs buffer (eg, frigates) or has the spare CPU to fit resists. Assume you have 10,000 raw hitpoints and 600s recharge, with 0% across the board resists, and are deciding on an invul field (eg; 30% resist bonus for simplicity's sakes) or a recharger with 15% resist bonus. The passive tank raw is 16 hp/s. With 30% resists the effective hitpoint tank goes to 20.8. 15% recharge bonus goes to 19.6. Therefore you will choose better resists to give a better EHP tank with a lower raw tank, and not choose shield rechargers. Ergo, to passive tank, you fill your lows with SPR's and deal with the capacitor problems (unneeded with Drakes, Rattlers, etc, and as we know no one ever passive shield tanks any laser boats). So, comparing the T2 modules; Recharger II = 15% Shield Power Relay = 25% Flux Coil II = 30% If you remove the shield hitpoint penalty for the flux coil, it invalidates the SPR. If you remove the cap penalty of the SPR, likewise, it becomes even moreso the module of choice. So the only real option with the flux coil is to either reduce the shield hitpoint penalty so that the nett effect is equal with the SPR so that thereby the tradeoff is, i guess, do you lose capacitor with the SPR or buffer with the flux coil? But if you consider the effect of midslots, you'd never, ever choose the flux coil anyway because as shown above, you can add resists to make any given pool of hitpoints more effective. In other words, why trade off capacitor for buffer when you can keep the buffer and use midslots to add even MORE buffer and MORE resists? So, yeah, to my mind the choices with the flux coil are to redesign the mechanism of its operation entirely, or remove it entirely because it is demonstrated that it cannot be modified to become useful and not a redundant variation of the SPR anyway. The whole idea of passive shield tanking is to add buffer, then resists, then recharge, capacitor be damned i'm using capless weapons or drones. This. Unfortunately. That said, its name lends itself perfectly to being the shield version of reactive armor hardener tbh.

Elizabeth Norn Nornir Research Create Alliance 603	Posted - 2015.06.22 12:56:52 - [61] - Quote I wonder if someone had a crystal ball. I hope they kept the receipt. http://i.imgur.com/db1qy7c.png WTS BPOs & BPO Packs WTS Collectible Large Rigged Small/Medium Ships
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 93	Posted - 2015.06.22 13:23:36 - [62] - Quote On option that has not been brought up to make the shield recharge mod worth while is an across the board decrease in shield recharge rate. Nuke the recharge rate of every ship by 75% and then give the mod a hefty bonus to make it an actual choice. This would also make it more about choice buffer, burst, sustained, or passive.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 38	Posted - 2015.06.22 15:15:39 - [63] - Quote Fredric Wolf wrote: On option that has not been brought up to make the shield recharge mod worth while is an across the board decrease in shield recharge rate. Nuke the recharge rate of every ship by 75% and then give the mod a hefty bonus to make it an actual choice. This would also make it more about choice buffer, burst, sustained, or passive. So nerf every ship in the game severely, then offer a "choice" to get back what you had already? Do you hate passive shield ships or something? This makes no sense.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 38	Posted - 2015.06.22 15:33:06 - [64] - Quote Looking over the spreadsheets I think the changes to flux coils is a step in the right direction though they could use a little more love for the loss HP. Perhaps split the penalty to half the current HP loss and add a small sig penalty. As for the rechargers, I think you should consider greatly reducing the fitting costs so that they are an easy fit on anything module, with the penalty being you are giving up a mid-slot for a weak module.
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 93	Posted - 2015.06.22 16:39:03 - [65] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: Fredric Wolf wrote: On option that has not been brought up to make the shield recharge mod worth while is an across the board decrease in shield recharge rate. Nuke the recharge rate of every ship by 75% and then give the mod a hefty bonus to make it an actual choice. This would also make it more about choice buffer, burst, sustained, or passive. So nerf every ship in the game severely, then offer a "choice" to get back what you had already? Do you hate passive shield ships or something? This makes no sense. I do not hate them at all but that is they only way to make this module work. Anything you add to a shield tank boost all 4 areas of its tank. Armor does not work the same way. I think giving up your base recharge and then being able to choose to make your ship have a higher recharge would be a better game dynamic then just having a high recharge rate
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 39	Posted - 2015.06.22 20:15:14 - [66] - Quote Fredric Wolf wrote: Terra Chrall wrote: Fredric Wolf wrote: On option that has not been brought up to make the shield recharge mod worth while is an across the board decrease in shield recharge rate. Nuke the recharge rate of every ship by 75% and then give the mod a hefty bonus to make it an actual choice. This would also make it more about choice buffer, burst, sustained, or passive. So nerf every ship in the game severely, then offer a "choice" to get back what you had already? Do you hate passive shield ships or something? This makes no sense. I do not hate them at all but that is they only way to make this module work. Anything you add to a shield tank boost all 4 areas of its tank. Armor does not work the same way. I think giving up your base recharge and then being able to choose to make your ship have a higher recharge would be a better game dynamic then just having a high recharge rate I think if you needed to go to that level of change, i.e. touching every ship, you might as well get rid of the module and pretend it never existed. I understand what you meant though. And choices are always good to have. But I think 2 steps back and 1 forward, in order to give more choices and less overall performance would not be well received by players. It would upset the current balance, so while I give you credit for an interesting redesign, I fear, to get it right would be overly complex.
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2467	Posted - 2015.06.23 00:09:15 - [67] - Quote Fredric Wolf wrote: On option that has not been brought up to make the shield recharge mod worth while is an across the board decrease in shield recharge rate. Nuke the recharge rate of every ship by 75% and then give the mod a hefty bonus to make it an actual choice. This would also make it more about choice buffer, burst, sustained, or passive. Er. Are you nuts? People require a reasonable passive rate of recharge on their shields if they are, eg, doing missions or especially incursions. With almost no recharge rate at all, in order to recover your buffer you would need logi. Now, i'm just going to assume you have no idea how PVP works, based on the stupidity of the above idea, so bear with me while I lay out a few scenarios where the current recharge rate is fine and the current non-modified passive tank of a ship with no SPR's or flux coils or shield rechargers is fine. Scenario 1: shield buffer frigates. Sure, if you brawl one on one, you are basically playing a game of DPS vs EHP. But people fit buffer shield to kiting ships, eg, 10MN Worm, LSE Svipuls, etc, where you are dipping in and out of the fight and relying on your buffer to recover within a minute or two instead of within 5 or 10 minutes. Scenario 2: shield buffer EWAR ships Yeah, yeah, most EWAR cruisers have armour tanks because midslots used for EWAR, but in shield fleets you do sometimes run shield Celestis with buffer tanks and 2 damps, or shield curses. These shis work at range, and typically cop drone DPS, and can and often do leave field periodically. If we take your proposal, their buffer would never recover, which means they get drven off field permanently. Currently, they can take a warp in and out and have most of their buffer back before they re-engage. Scenario 3: armour ships, anywhere Shield buffer is an important part of armour tanking. Even if it's only a few thousand hitpoints, it's still buffer. If your battleship takes 30 minutes to recharge it's shields, that's bad. So you would propose removing viable options for mobile warfare from the game just to save a bunch of unused or lightly used niche modules from copping the nerf/delete hammer. You'd relegate shield harpy fleets to the dustbin just to make the flux coil look good? That's cart before donkey thinking. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 93	Posted - 2015.06.23 14:20:56 - [68] - Quote Er. Are you nuts? People require a reasonable passive rate of recharge on their shields if they are, eg, doing missions or especially incursions. With almost no recharge rate at all, in order to recover your buffer you would need logi. Now, i'm just going to assume you have no idea how PVP works, based on the stupidity of the above idea, so bear with me while I lay out a few scenarios where the current recharge rate is fine and the current non-modified passive tank of a ship with no SPR's or flux coils or shield rechargers is fine. Scenario 1: shield buffer frigates. Sure, if you brawl one on one, you are basically playing a game of DPS vs EHP. But people fit buffer shield to kiting ships, eg, 10MN Worm, LSE Svipuls, etc, where you are dipping in and out of the fight and relying on your buffer to recover within a minute or two instead of within 5 or 10 minutes. Scenario 2: shield buffer EWAR ships Yeah, yeah, most EWAR cruisers have armour tanks because midslots used for EWAR, but in shield fleets you do sometimes run shield Celestis with buffer tanks and 2 damps, or shield curses. These shis work at range, and typically cop drone DPS, and can and often do leave field periodically. If we take your proposal, their buffer would never recover, which means they get drven off field permanently. Currently, they can take a warp in and out and have most of their buffer back before they re-engage. Scenario 3: armour ships, anywhere Shield buffer is an important part of armour tanking. Even if it's only a few thousand hitpoints, it's still buffer. If your battleship takes 30 minutes to recharge it's shields, that's bad. So you would propose removing viable options for mobile warfare from the game just to save a bunch of unused or lightly used niche modules from copping the nerf/delete hammer. You'd relegate shield harpy fleets to the dustbin just to make the flux coil look good? That's cart before donkey thinking.[/quote] You should have read the rest of the post before you posted this. Also in all your scenarios you have no logi on the field? Have you ever PVP'd logi is important just like everything else. But lets move on from that right now. Shield buffer is nice and recharge is nice but it is not this magical need like you are making it out to be. If it did not recharge at its current rate there are ways to work around it. I never said it was a good idea I said that is the only way to make these mods viable in any way. TBH the best solution to these mods is to remove them from game or a dynamic change (Shield Recharges and Shield Flux Coil) in every situation there is a better mod to fit every time. Edit: Also do not even bring up incursion fits. These ships are so paper tanked to squeeze out that extra 1 dps its silly they could tank just fine but their precious isk/h would go down a little so how dare anyone touch that.
James Baboli Novablasters 913	Posted - 2015.06.23 14:32:12 - [69] - Quote Trinkets friend wrote: Er. Are you nuts? People require a reasonable passive rate of recharge on their shields if they are, eg, doing missions or especially incursions. With almost no recharge rate at all, in order to recover your buffer you would need logi. . The incursions and missions statements are fallacious. Incursions already have logi, and armor shouldn't be relying on shield HP for anything. I say this as someone who has FC'd in both armor and shield fleets. As for missions, if your armor setup relies on shield buffer, just hit that little "dock" button each time you finish a mission. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
James Baboli Novablasters 913	Posted - 2015.06.23 14:38:17 - [70] - Quote Fredric Wolf wrote: Edit: Also do not even bring up incursion fits. These ships are so paper tanked to squeeze out that extra 1 dps its silly they could tank just fine but their precious isk/h would go down a little so how dare anyone touch that. Aside from shiny VG communities, everyone in highsec. flies with 20-100% more buffer than is actually needed by the sites and 120-300% the number of reps needed with the boosters. Back to the topic: Without a massive boost to passive tanking, these mods are pretty well sunk in my books. More buffer is almost always more helpful than any of the pure recharge time mods, and so unless you have slots but not CPU, it's usually going to be PDSes for the buffer, recharge, and ability to fit more and/or bigger extenders. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 690	Posted - 2015.06.23 15:20:26 - [71] - Quote Now that I took the time to skip over the sheets I am concerned about the choices for shield rechargers since barbariens never contributed anything to the society they shouldn't be coming from them - shield tech is Caldari. Please reconsider the introduction of COSMOS items. Currently the rule is that you can make all COSMOS missions only once per character - zee end. So make it faction Caldari Navy or Dread Gursistas. And as my fellow poster before me have stated, you can just remove shield flux coils from the game. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Alexis Nightwish 255	Posted - 2015.06.23 18:13:20 - [72] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Now that I took the time to skip over the sheets I am concerned about the choices for shield rechargers since barbariens never contributed anything to the society they shouldn't be coming from them - shield tech is Caldari. Please reconsider the introduction of COSMOS items. Currently the rule is that you can make all COSMOS missions only once per character - zee end. So make it faction Caldari Navy or Dread Gursistas. And as my fellow poster before me have stated, you can just remove shield flux coils from the game. Sleeper caches can drop COSMOS BPCs. CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1519	Posted - 2015.06.23 20:24:15 - [73] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Back to the topic: Without a massive boost to passive tanking, these mods are pretty well sunk in my books. More buffer is almost always more helpful than any of the pure recharge time mods, and so unless you have slots but not CPU, it's usually going to be PDSes for the buffer, recharge, and ability to fit more and/or bigger extenders. At what point should rechargers overtake buffer mods?
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 691	Posted - 2015.06.23 21:31:13 - [74] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: ...Sleeper caches can drop COSMOS BPCs. Oh! I thought they only drop those warp implants or polarized gun copies that nobody wants. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Enya Sparhawk Black Tea and Talons 59	Posted - 2015.06.23 21:43:29 - [75] - Quote Victor Emmanuel wrote: Altrue wrote: Shield rechargers Suggestion: What about a module that modifies the curve of shield regeneration to have the optimal regeneration start earlier and last longer? That would definitely be a nice addition to Shield Flux Coils or Shield Rechargers. An active shield recharge module that when activated reduces shield hitpoints by a certain percentage in order to increase the peak shield recharge from aproximately one third of shield hitpoints (adjusted by the new loss) to say two thirds (fortified by the tactical shield manipulation skill slowing the loss of the peak recharge after getting below 2/3; normal loss at 1/3 shield?). That would be definitely useful. Stacking would only hinder you (loss of more shield hitpoints without giving you anymore of a bonus) but would compliment modules that affect the overall shield recharge rates. Losing actual shield hitpoints would be enough of a hindrance over a cap draining module (or split the difference over both overalls) but would definitely bolster more passive fleets... Nothing being active, so you wouldn't be draining anything, going into a fight knowing exactly what you have with some certainty of having a defence over neuts at a loss to overall stats when active... Passive means planning, so you wouldn't be using something like this a shield booster... Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne Déan gáire...Tiocfaidh ár lá

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 271	Posted - 2015.06.24 13:55:47 - [76] - Quote So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 3455	Posted - 2015.06.24 14:42:05 - [77] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. Yes, they are used in passive recharge tanks. But their use is very sparse. Usually extenders give more recharge, until you stack a few of them up. After that, invuls provide more DPS tanking, until you stack up several of those. Only then are rechargers worth using. Just a few ships have sufficient mids to get to this point. Hence, rechargers are little used. Know a Frozen fan? Check this out Frozen fanfiction
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2930	Posted - 2015.06.24 14:51:02 - [78] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. I would look at shield rechargers as a passive equivalent to a shield booster, apply stacking penalties as needed. Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
James Baboli Novablasters 914	Posted - 2015.06.24 15:02:01 - [79] - Quote Tyberius Franklin wrote: James Baboli wrote: Back to the topic: Without a massive boost to passive tanking, these mods are pretty well sunk in my books. More buffer is almost always more helpful than any of the pure recharge time mods, and so unless you have slots but not CPU, it's usually going to be PDSes for the buffer, recharge, and ability to fit more and/or bigger extenders. At what point should rechargers overtake buffer mods? IMO,after the 2nd extender, it should be 1 recharge then another extender then 2 recharge in order of most effect per slot for passive tank. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
James Zimmer Furtherance. 34	Posted - 2015.06.24 15:12:33 - [80] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. Interesting, thanks for the follow up! In partial disbelief, I went and did some quick fitting testing, and I feel stupid now. Shield rechargers on a rattlesnake lead to better tank than shield extenders, and that remains true when I slap on shield powr relays and field purgers. The best tanks I could produce used a combination of shield rechargers, extenders and resist mods, so I'd say you're right on the money when it comes to shield rechargers; they are very valid for PvE. That said, passive tanking is pretty rare and I wouldn't mind a % point or two added to passive tanking modules, especially when they compete with ASBs for capless tanking. If that goes beyond the purpose of tiericide, I understand that too. When it comes to shield flux coils, the issue is in the nature of passive tanking. People don't passive tank because it's better than active tanking; it's not. They passive tank when the are doing something solo, or in pairs (as opposed to larger groups, which will remote rep) and expect to be nueted hard. They don't expect to have any cap anyway, so why not give it up for better shield regen? Something that continues to matter is sig, so maybe flux coils that help reduce shield based sig increases would make it worth it to throw 1 or 2 of these on with your other modules. Even then, I think it will be an uphill battle when they compete with a stronger tank, especially when that ship is likely to be dead in the water, capped out, prop mod off, and not moving fast enough to avoid much damage anyway. Hopefully that gives you a little more perspective as you try to figure out what to do with them. Thanks again!

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1898	Posted - 2015.06.24 15:21:04 - [81] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. If the Shield Rechargers are getting stopped from being buffed because of Rattlesnakes only, maybe its time to nerf Rattlesnakes then? I mean they can solo drifters by passive tanking, maybe they are a tiny bit over-powered? Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Destoya Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 428	Posted - 2015.06.24 15:47:23 - [82] - Quote James Zimmer wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. Interesting, thanks for the follow up! In partial disbelief, I went and did some quick fitting testing, and I feel stupid now. Shield rechargers on a rattlesnake lead to better tank than shield extenders, and that remains true when I slap on shield powr relays and field purgers. The best tanks I could produce used a combination of shield rechargers, extenders and resist mods, so I'd say you're right on the money when it comes to shield rechargers; they are very valid for PvE. That said, passive tanking is pretty rare and I wouldn't mind a % point or two added to passive tanking modules, especially when they compete with ASBs for capless tanking. If that goes beyond the purpose of tiericide, I understand that too. ! I was unable to reproduce the same results until you take things into ludicrous levels to try to prove something that doesn't exist. Keeping at least 3 damage mods slots free and a slot for an afterburner the best tank is still 2x shield extenders, 4x hardeners. Two of the hardeners were even invuls to deter gankers etc; it's even worse with multiple specific hardeners . The only thing i found shield rechargers might even have a role in is if you're trying to maximize a completely capless tank by fitting 6x shield power relays, and even then more passive shield resist amplifiers are in most cases better. This is regardless of the fact that since the rattlesnake got changed, it is FAR better in an active tank version for almost every type of pve gameplay. The ship needs slots for damage mods and the way to get them is to disregard the passive tank and put a shield booster on. I'm sorry but trying to argue that a module is useful in a handful of edge cases for the ship with the most base shield HP in the game except for the State Raven (which means it benefits the least from shield extenders to its passive tank) isn't very compelling in my opinion.
Fzhal Tessaract Industries 32	Posted - 2015.06.24 16:19:21 - [83] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Have you considered moving all the "Compact" type words to the front of the names. It makes shopping and fitting so much easier. If I know I'm short on CPU my eyes could quickly find Compact modules instead of having to read each and every category line for the important part in the middle... Shield Power Relay I Mark I Compact Shield Power Relay Type-D Restrained Shield Power Relay Shield Power Relay II 'Basic' Shield Power Relay Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay Vs (Much Better) Shield Power Relay I Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Shield Power Relay II 'Basic' Shield Power Relay (why are the single quotes used anyway?) Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay To be honest, I've never liked the I/II scheme because it puts the important info at the end. I really wish all the schemes were more like: Std. Shield Power Relay Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Adv. Shield Power Relay 'Basic' Shield Power Relay [Adv./Prototype] Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay
James Zimmer Furtherance. 36	Posted - 2015.06.24 18:00:58 - [84] - Quote Destoya wrote: I was unable to reproduce the same results until you take things into ludicrous levels to try to prove something that doesn't exist. Keeping at least 3 damage mods slots free and a slot for an afterburner the best tank is still 2x shield extenders, 4x hardeners. Two of the hardeners were even invuls to deter gankers etc; it's even worse with multiple specific hardeners . The only thing i found shield rechargers might even have a role in is if you're trying to maximize a completely capless tank by fitting 6x shield power relays, and even then more passive shield resist amplifiers are in most cases better. This is regardless of the fact that since the rattlesnake got changed, it is FAR better in an active tank version for almost every type of pve gameplay. The ship needs slots for damage mods and the way to get them is to disregard the passive tank and put a shield booster on. I'm sorry but trying to argue that a module is useful in a handful of edge cases for the ship with the most base shield HP in the game except for the State Raven (which means it benefits the least from shield extenders to its passive tank) isn't very compelling in my opinion. That's completely fair, the scope of my experiment was pretty limited, and maybe I was a little premature in saying shield rechargers are valid for PvE. I was thinking about wormhole space where sleepers often completely cap you out, and do omni damage, so a truely capless tank and an omni-tank were musts for me. Limiting myself to 3 damage mods, a prop mod and T2 mods, the best passive tank I could produce tanked 548 DPS and was a large shield extender, an EM and thermal resistance amplifier, and 3 shield rechargers for mids. Lows and rigs should be pretty obvious. If i go full bling mode (which is not entirely unlikely), I get a 658 DPS tank with a shield extender and the following Pith A-type resistance modules: 2 EM, 1 thermal, 1 kinetic and 1 explosive. Not surprising given the lack of deadspace shield rechargers to compete. I should also mention that I did this on eve droid, which isn't totally up to date. However, I don't think there are any recent changes that would impact the result. The greater question is: What would I do with a 658 DPS tank Rattlesnake? There are much better options for virtually every mission and deadspace plex, so wormholes probably, C2s specificly because it won't be able to tank anything higher. It would run them like a beast, but that's a lot of risk, and I could easily run C2s in a much-cheaper ship. So maybe a better statement about shield rechargers would be this: Shield rechargers can make passive-tanked battleships stronger in cases where cost is a concern, but that may be irrelevant because passive-tanked battleships may not be practical anyway.

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 274	Posted - 2015.06.24 18:58:10 - [85] - Quote James Zimmer wrote: The greater question is: What would I do with a 658 DPS tank Rattlesnake? There are much better options for virtually every mission and deadspace plex, so wormholes probably, C2s specificly because it won't be able to tank anything higher. It would run them like a beast, but that's a lot of risk, and I could easily run C2s in a much-cheaper ship. So maybe a better statement about shield rechargers would be this: Shield rechargers can make passive-tanked battleships stronger in cases where cost is a concern, but that may be irrelevant because passive-tanked battleships may not be practical anyway. This is probably completely valid, hence the looking in to actual usage metrics to see if we should change the module set further. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1905	Posted - 2015.06.24 20:16:18 - [86] - Quote Shield rechargers are a mid slot, mid slots are a big deal especially for shield stuff. Glad to see there is hope to improvement. In addition to that, there is a sizeable point to be made here about the difference between theoretical maximum passive regeneration, and practical maximum passive regeneration when put in relation with the total shield HP. The way passive regeneration works, you have to have enough shield buffer that you actually have a decent shot at reaching the peak level. If it was at 25% for instance, you need to have enough hitpoints that a hit does not moves you from 30% to 20% shield, because then you miss the peak. That's why looking at values like theoretical regen/sec is pointless for shield flux coils, because if they diminish the total amount of shield so much that you can get from 35% to 10% in one hit, it becomes highly dangerous. The same logic applies for shield rechargers. Yes in some situations, adding another extender will add less hp/sec than adding a shield recharger, but what about the shield buffer difference? It matters, too! In my opinion, shield rechargers should give bonus % HP in addition to the current shield regen bonus. This way they are not very useful if you do not already have a sizeable shield buffer. Therefore, they do not compete with shield extenders. Shield flux coil penalties should be changed to something like a bit of power grid reduction, and a bit of signature radius increase. This way, they are a viable alternative if you want to preserve your capacitor. But if capacitor is something you know how to manage, you can still opt for a tighter fitting and an easier damage application against you, but with an easier time with the capacitor. Or in other word, Shield power relays are modules for when you have a high player skill, whereas Shield flux coils are for when you prefer the path of easy capacitor management. Alternatively, Shield flux coils could just retain their shield HP penalty, but have their amount of shield regeneration increased by 50%. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
James Zimmer Furtherance. 39	Posted - 2015.06.25 11:45:46 - [87] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: James Zimmer wrote: The greater question is: What would I do with a 658 DPS tank Rattlesnake? There are much better options for virtually every mission and deadspace plex, so wormholes probably, C2s specificly because it won't be able to tank anything higher. It would run them like a beast, but that's a lot of risk, and I could easily run C2s in a much-cheaper ship. So maybe a better statement about shield rechargers would be this: Shield rechargers can make passive-tanked battleships stronger in cases where cost is a concern, but that may be irrelevant because passive-tanked battleships may not be practical anyway. This is probably completely valid, hence the looking in to actual usage metrics to see if we should change the module set further. Thanks for the follow up!
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 160	Posted - 2015.06.25 14:03:30 - [88] - Quote One of the problems with a passivetank is the amount of fittingslots you use that could otherwise be used for damage or projection. The first idea that came to my mind making these modules more useful was to lower the fittingrequirements even more, there are almost no midslot modules that take <15 cpu.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1941	Posted - 2015.06.25 17:52:47 - [89] - Quote Shilalasar wrote: One of the problems with a passivetank is the amount of fittingslots you use that could otherwise be used for damage or projection. The first idea that came to my mind making these modules more useful was to lower the fittingrequirements even more, there are almost no midslot modules that take <15 cpu. Lowering the fitting requirement won't change your stated problem. A shield recharger will still take a valuable mid slot even if it cost 0 PG and 0 CPU.
Enya Sparhawk Black Tea and Talons 59	Posted - 2015.06.25 22:05:03 - [90] - Quote Altrue wrote: In my opinion, shield rechargers should give bonus % HP in addition to the current shield regen bonus. This way they are not very useful if you do not already have a sizeable shield buffer. Therefore, they do not compete with shield extenders. Shield flux coil penalties should be changed to something like a bit of power grid reduction, and a bit of signature radius increase. This way, they are a viable alternative if you want to preserve your capacitor. But if capacitor is something you know how to manage, you can still opt for a tighter fitting and an easier damage application against you, but with an easier time with the capacitor. Or in other word, Shield power relays are modules for when you have a high player skill, whereas Shield flux coils are for when you prefer the path of easy capacitor management. Alternatively, Shield flux coils could just retain their shield HP penalty, but have their amount of shield regeneration increased by 50%. I think they should definitely stay away from any sort of sig radius increase with any of these things...That would be too much of a penalty on something that is already over burdened on shield tanking ships (at least for the Caldari). There's no real fluency with these modules; specialization in a passive shield fitting should be a viable and effective PVP option (ie determined by a high player skill/experience). Not a 'one or the other type' of senerio where you roll the dice. The only way these things can be balanced is by allowing them to interact seamlessly with each other or other shield mods. Balance with the slot layouts and penalties not favouring one alone while the other two are made into scrap. So the question remains, how is this done? So far the only viable option is through the careful redetermination of shield recharge limits. I'd rather not have another form of minor extender or booster; I want the ability to create and assemble so I can actually use my skills and fly the ship. Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne Déan gáire...Tiocfaidh ár lá

Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1526	Posted - 2015.06.26 00:46:39 - [91] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Tyberius Franklin wrote: James Baboli wrote: Back to the topic: Without a massive boost to passive tanking, these mods are pretty well sunk in my books. More buffer is almost always more helpful than any of the pure recharge time mods, and so unless you have slots but not CPU, it's usually going to be PDSes for the buffer, recharge, and ability to fit more and/or bigger extenders. At what point should rechargers overtake buffer mods? IMO,after the 2nd extender, it should be 1 recharge then another extender then 2 recharge in order of most effect per slot for passive tank. I realized after asking this that that was a poor metric without further definition. Depending on the buffer mods used and the ship it could range from as little as near the current 15% up to almost 45%. On the one hand 35%-40% works for most ships within the cruiser range using LSEs (gila's high base shields making it an outlier), but that's a pretty massive buff on the BS side and frigates/destroyers often don't have the fitting to make the metric relevant. I suppose if the buff to BS passive tanks isn't an issue ~35% might be a good number.
Chance Ravinne WiNGSPAN Delivery Services 264	Posted - 2015.06.26 03:53:36 - [92] - Quote I actually disagree and feel the opposite. Right now, knowing it goes at the end means I don't have to know anything to search for a compact module. I can (in theory) go in the market and search "Compact shield booster" "compact shield extender" "compact torpedo launcher" "compact sensor booster" and just KNOW without having to memorize flavor names, this will find the correct module. Fzhal wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Have you considered moving all the "Compact" type words to the front of the names. It makes shopping and fitting so much easier. If I know I'm short on CPU my eyes could quickly find Compact modules instead of having to read each and every category line for the important part in the middle... Shield Power Relay I Mark I Compact Shield Power Relay Type-D Restrained Shield Power Relay Shield Power Relay II 'Basic' Shield Power Relay Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay Vs (Much Better) Shield Power Relay I Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Shield Power Relay II 'Basic' Shield Power Relay (why are the single quotes used anyway?) Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay To be honest, I've never liked the I/II scheme because it puts the important info at the end. I really wish all the schemes were more like: Std. Shield Power Relay Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Adv. Shield Power Relay 'Basic' Shield Power Relay [Adv./Prototype] Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
HiddenPorpoise Expendable Miscreants 376	Posted - 2015.06.26 04:31:22 - [93] - Quote We could go real crazy and remove flavor text from non story mods.
James Baboli Novablasters 922	Posted - 2015.06.26 05:28:11 - [94] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: James Zimmer wrote: The greater question is: What would I do with a 658 DPS tank Rattlesnake? There are much better options for virtually every mission and deadspace plex, so wormholes probably, C2s specificly because it won't be able to tank anything higher. It would run them like a beast, but that's a lot of risk, and I could easily run C2s in a much-cheaper ship. So maybe a better statement about shield rechargers would be this: Shield rechargers can make passive-tanked battleships stronger in cases where cost is a concern, but that may be irrelevant because passive-tanked battleships may not be practical anyway. This is probably completely valid, hence the looking in to actual usage metrics to see if we should change the module set further. From medium distant history to me, less than 658 DPS tank will work in c3s, and as part of a team in c4s though you end up needing to remove DPS quickly in c4s with that sort of tank. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Shilalasar Dead Sky Inc. 160	Posted - 2015.06.26 20:44:21 - [95] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Shilalasar wrote: One of the problems with a passivetank is the amount of fittingslots you use that could otherwise be used for damage or projection. The first idea that came to my mind making these modules more useful was to lower the fittingrequirements even more, there are almost no midslot modules that take <15 cpu. Lowering the fitting requirement won't change your stated problem. A shield recharger will still take a valuable mid slot even if it cost 0 PG and 0 CPU. Yeah, those are two unrelated statements. Sorry that was not clear.
Lidia Caderu Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 42	Posted - 2015.06.27 10:00:03 - [96] - Quote Flux coils need boost, set at lest 35% for T2 version, in other case there is no much sense in that module, including hi CPU usage.
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 4	Posted - 2015.06.28 11:29:57 - [97] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: This is probably completely valid, hence the looking in to actual usage metrics to see if we should change the module set further. Could we get an update on what kinds of direction you guys might be leaning on for flux coils and rechargers? A lot of us would be really excited for some new directions to take shield tanking. OS extender bait brick and 1 oversized asb + 1 undersized asb as the only two optimal fits is getting a little stale. What if the shield recharger was an active module. 10 sec cycle, 50% reduction in shield recharge time, cap recharge goes to zero. You trade all your cap and start using cap since it's an active module in exchange for huge shield recharge. Makes you really vulnerable to neuts. You would use it after you pull range to buffer up your shield or warp to a safe. Or with cap less cap booster fed fits. And I would like to reiterate on the low slot flux cool idea I have but with values for t2. 20% increase in shield hit points, with 35% increase in shield recharge time. You net lose recharge, but gain substantial buffer in exchange, and when you rebalance layerings, 20% increase in hitpoints, with 10% increase in the mass of fitted plates.
Nya Kittenheart Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 19	Posted - 2015.06.28 19:32:02 - [98] - Quote Kenrailae wrote: Yay ish sticky now! But seriously, can we cut the crap with all this stalling and do t3's and sentries?? Nothing can be really balanced while t3's and sentries are so broken. Really this is all wasted effort until the real problems are fixed. Hint: shield recharges are not the major issue. Sentries are not broken Ishtar is . Concerning the current change i still find shield recharge way too weak to be usable in any meaningful way and honnestly if passive recharge as a tanking way would dissapear nobody would notice to be honnest.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2477	Posted - 2015.06.30 04:26:53 - [99] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. I think metas just need to drop way less. Meta variants should cost way more than T1 and only sometimes less than T2. T1 should be used by anyone trying to save ISK, esp. newer players and on whelp fits. .
Zekora Rally Negative Density Whatever. 19	Posted - 2015.06.30 14:12:00 - [100] - Quote Altrue wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. If the Shield Rechargers are getting stopped from being buffed because of Rattlesnakes only, maybe its time to nerf Rattlesnakes then? I mean they can solo drifters by passive tanking, maybe they are a tiny bit over-powered? The rattlesnake is the only sub cap in the game that can boast of having a great passive tank and it comes at the cost of fitting almost every other slot with a tank module, if you want to be able to run C5 sites solo at least. CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. Even with the rattlesnake, i've found it better to swap out shield rechargers for passive shield resistance mods as having much better resists trumps the extra 50 or so regen gained with the shield recharger, everytime, especially if one is fitting against sleepers that do more EM/THERMAL than KIN/EXP and vice versa. If we had adaptive passive shield tanking modules, the shield recharger might make a bit more sense with the freed up mid slots, but I, as well those in my corp that know what they are doing, have to the conclusion that there's no need to fit more than one shield recharger on a C5 combat site running rattlesnake fit.

Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2482	Posted - 2015.06.30 14:31:03 - [101] - Quote Altrue wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. It was mentioned that Shield Rechargers are used in passive PvE shield tanking, where the regen is more important. On larger ships like the Rattlesnake, you can get a higher shield regeneration rate that if you were to use Shield Extenders for example. With that being said we might still make some minor changes to the module set, and there's some research being done into usage rates of Shield Rechargers, especially in PvE. Shield Flux Coils were agreed upon to be something we are less happy with, so there may be some more significant changes to them. It is fairly unlikely they will be removed outright. If the Shield Rechargers are getting stopped from being buffed because of Rattlesnakes only, maybe its time to nerf Rattlesnakes then? I mean they can solo drifters by passive tanking, maybe they are a tiny bit over-powered? I am more inclined to say that the reason Rattlesnakes even use them is because there are no shield extenders big enough for battleships. It's primarily Rattlesnakes because there aren't a lot of other battleships with a passive tank bonus. The Rokh lacks mid slots and large turrets aren't great for ratting, and the Navy Scorpion while fully able to fit a Rattlesnake tank, is underwhelming because large missiles are fairly weak if you don't have a web/painter and that diminishes the tank. In short, it's because the Rattlesnake is specifically the drone+passive shield combo, but more specifically because there are no proper shield extenders for battleships. Give battleships an X-Large Shield Extender and you will never see a Rattlesnake sporting a shield recharger again. Then we can talk about buffing shield rechargers. Want my advice? I say increase shield recharge bonuses by a huge amount but give shield recharge effects a stacking penalty. Make it so 4 mods can give you around 3-5x recharge rate. Give me a top hat.
BugraT WarheaD 170	Posted - 2015.06.30 15:26:47 - [102] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Still don't like meta modules providing superior stats compared to T1. There is no reason to use T1 over meta. meta should provide different pro's and con's with T1 being the base line. This.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 49	Posted - 2015.06.30 17:59:21 - [103] - Quote What if shield rechargers had a bonus to reduce sig penalties from other mods/rigs? So instead of of trading buffer or resists for recharge only, you are getting recharge and a better signature when using modules that increase your sig. Now you have an interesting choice as to which stats you are modifying. Of course it would never lower you below your base signature and shouldn't completely negate penalties either.
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2492	Posted - 2015.07.01 06:51:56 - [104] - Quote I don't think that a module to reduce your signature is ever going to be a good idea, because you will find ships fitting them into spare mids (eg; jackdaw, Sacrilege, etc) with AAR tanks in order to get a synergy between low-sig armour tank and the sig-reducing module. Consider also the effect of this in Wolf-Rayet wormholes with T3 Destroyers such as an armour-fit Svipul with links in a C13 already gets down to a sig radius of 23m, if you chopped that another 20% it gets down to the same sig as a light drone. Ridiculous. - - - I think that the one or two uses of shield rechargers (rattler, SNI) might barely justify keeping them as they are, but unless they become significantly stronger the maths will work against them every time, as proved above. - - - I will again plump the idea of the Flux Coil being a module for the passive transfer of capacitor to shield. It would create interesting Bhaalgorn fits in pulsars, where you could suck cap from your opponents and convert the capacitor into shield hitpoints, etc, and similarly in k-space. Another thing to consider CCP Terminus, when discussing Rattlesnakes in PVE, is the fact that by and large the way they are being used these days in most situations besides nullsec anomalies (where they are mostly overkill for the purpose they are used in) is in tandem with a depot. 90% ofRattler pilots will drop a depot and tractor, and refit on the fly using the depot to switch between tank and gank, or if being ganked in a wormhole, MJD and stabs. Rattler pairs in C4's will also hot swap high slots between cap transfers, shield RR and smartbombs using a depot. So I gues, when looking at Rattlesnake usage of shield rechargers, you have to consider that the guys using them are probably not permanently using them anyway; during high DPS phases of running a combat site or DED complex you may fit the recharger for a minute or two to gain the extra 50 HP/s recharge, but when the DPs falls off you can swap immediately for a passive hardener, or an Omnidirectional Tracking Link and get uber drone tracking, or a target painter, etc. Likewise a proper C4 rattler will have a full DPS gank fit and a full passive fit; when your partner is being primed you swap SPR's for DCU's, in the very least, and then swap back when he reports aggro switch. As said before, if you make the flux coil an active module, the choice therefore if whether to activate it (and be unable to swap out the module if aggro switches) or swap it for a passive module. Just my 5c. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Fzhal Tessaract Industries 35	Posted - 2015.07.01 19:45:34 - [105] - Quote Or you could just search for "~~compact~~ sensor booster" and look for what starts with Compact. And searching for "Compact shield booster" would yield all sizes. Think about it, when you look at an item's variation tab (I think) it lists things by Meta level, which was immensely helpful. Now that they are going away from Meta level, it will not be as easy. Shopping while browsing the market has always been more of a chore than it should be, because of the order things are listed: Primary sort = [Not T2] then T2 (Thankfully Metta 6+ has their own categories) Secondary sort = Alphabetical Which will have the lowest CPU? Gonna have to go to the item section scroll through all, until T2, and remember the lowest CPU so far, then keep scrolling for a lower one. Found it! Oops, what was the name of that lowest CPU mod, I know it was "[Something] Compact", but what did it start with... Drat, Gonna have to scroll up looking for that lowest number again. Wait, while trying to remember the module name I forgot what the lowest CPU number was, FRACK!!! It's madness! It is so bad that we all know that the best way to create a new fit is to generate a shopping list in a 3rd party program (that lists them by fitting need), import the list, view market for each item... The current market sorting and module naming conventions actually INHIBIT You do have a point though, which is why I'd revise my request to name things by: 1. Fitting/Effectiveness Indicator - "[Basic/Compact/Prototype/Restrained/Standard/Superior]" 2. Item Type - "Shield Power Relay" 3. Flavor Text - "Type-D" We can both win Chance... Maybe someone could make some Effectiveness indicators that are also alphabetically ordered as well! Chance Ravinne wrote: I actually disagree and feel the opposite. Right now, knowing it goes at the end means I don't have to know anything to search for a compact module. I can (in theory) go in the market and search "Compact shield booster" "compact shield extender" "compact torpedo launcher" "compact sensor booster" and just KNOW without having to memorize flavor names, this will find the correct module. Fzhal wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Have you considered moving all the "Compact" type words to the front of the names. It makes shopping and fitting so much easier. If I know I'm short on CPU my eyes could quickly find Compact modules instead of having to read each and every category line for the important part in the middle... To be honest, I've never liked the I/II scheme because it puts the important info at the end. I really wish all the schemes were more like: Std. Shield Power Relay Compact Mark I Shield Power Relay Restrained Type-D Shield Power Relay Adv. Shield Power Relay 'Basic' Shield Power Relay [Adv./Prototype] Caldari Navy Shield Power Relay
Kaivar Lancer Placid Peace Corps 624	Posted - 2015.07.01 22:11:21 - [106] - Quote I love the module tiercide. Keep it up CCP. :)
Delarian Rox New Home Inc. 22	Posted - 2015.07.02 12:37:39 - [107] - Quote Rechargers: I think rechargers are fine right there they will be after tiercide. We should compare them with resistance amplifiers and not with resistance wards(cap usage, harder to fit) or extenders(HUGE fitting difference) so they are actualy fine in some standard situations. Coils and relays: I think flux coil real recharge bonus should be better. You'll almost never feel power relay drawback on a passive tanked ships even if you try to speedtank with AB(most comon situation), but you'll feel it with flux coil as it reduces ship ability to sustain alfa strike and you can fall under regeneration peak more easily. They just more risky so they should be more powerful.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn Department 10 242	Posted - 2015.07.02 14:07:31 - [108] - Quote I doubt hardly anyone fits either of those three module types so maybe best to delete them or radically change their stats to make them worth fitting. Certainly fitting shield recharger modules is always a sign of a badly fitted ship whether in PvE or PvP. " They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick. " Find out what ? "-áAbraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick. Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Kyanite Sentak The Minutemen The Bastion 0	Posted - 2015.07.05 16:36:56 - [109] - Quote So what's up making the game less 'Complex' you guys do realize fans of this game enjoy the complexity... if we wanted some simple disneyland that was easy to play we'd be over at Blizzard playing WoW. Work on that rectalcranial... I'll be quitting this game if it is oversimplified.
Algarion Getz Aideron Corp 39	Posted - 2015.07.06 14:25:42 - [110] - Quote Vic Vorlon wrote: @Nagarythe, the advantage with T1 modules is that you can manufacture them yourself. For some circumstances, that's enough of a benefit. If you want better modules (the meta ones) you have to go ratting or go shopping. This is true, but many meta modules are very cheap. Most of the time, choosing the base T1 module has only disadvantages. In my opinion, every module in the game should be useful.

Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2957	Posted - 2015.07.10 17:20:31 - [111] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: So, as I mentioned earlier, I brought up the Shield Flux Coils and Shield Rechargers comments people have made at the latest module tiericide meeting. Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats? Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 1171	Posted - 2015.07.10 17:38:20 - [112] - Quote Algarion Getz wrote: Vic Vorlon wrote: @Nagarythe, the advantage with T1 modules is that you can manufacture them yourself. For some circumstances, that's enough of a benefit. If you want better modules (the meta ones) you have to go ratting or go shopping. This is true, but many meta modules are very cheap. Most of the time, choosing the base T1 module has only disadvantages. In my opinion, every module in the game should be useful. The t1 modules are useful. If you're a brokebutt noob and it's all you can fit or afford. As you progress in the game you get better stuff. I'll play analogy gal. When you get out of school and start out in life on your own. Rhaman noodles are pretty awesome. Warm and filling and not poison to your body. (t1) Then you get a premant job, the bills are paid down. Spagetti and some meatballs are great. Same noodles (more or less) but now you can afford to add some sauce and some ground up cow, because you can afford it. (meta) You've worked you way up in the company and you're a department head. You go out for dinner. Lingini w/ alfredo sauce and sprinkle some clam across it. (t2) You had a banner year! Life is awesome. You spend your 'Im awesome' bonus on prime rib, imported wine, some lobster. (faction/ded bling) So now you're in your x-type mach blitzing level 4 missions. Rhaman noodles don't even enter your mind, but out there somewhere there is a brokebutt noob wipin the sweat off his forehead thanking his lucky stars that his t1 shield booster got him passed those 3 frigates in the lvl 1 pirate abound mission. It's all relative dude. Everything is useful. At the end of the day, if a module is only useful for invention.... so what?

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 286	Posted - 2015.07.15 01:52:41 - [113] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats? Nothing yet. Aegis and sov have taken priority for now. I'll make sure to post an update when there's more information. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1304	Posted - 2015.07.15 04:00:09 - [114] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats? Nothing yet. Aegis and sov have taken priority for now. I'll make sure to post an update when there's more information. Thank you for at least responding with that much. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
HiddenPorpoise Expendable Miscreants 383	Posted - 2015.07.15 09:09:19 - [115] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: The t1 modules are useful. If you're a brokebutt noob and it's all you can fit or afford. As you progress in the game you get better stuff. Nearly all non gun/tank mods meta is cheaper, noobs use t1 because they don't know.
Serendipity Lost Repo Industries 1186	Posted - 2015.07.15 12:58:55 - [116] - Quote HiddenPorpoise wrote: Serendipity Lost wrote: The t1 modules are useful. If you're a brokebutt noob and it's all you can fit or afford. As you progress in the game you get better stuff. Nearly all non gun/tank mods meta is cheaper, noobs use t1 because they don't know. That's fine too. It defines the line. t1 user = noob. meta user = young pilot on his way up in the world. The proliferation of meta mods is due to cry bears lobbying for things like mtu. Automating the gathering of resources is not good for the games economy. The closer you get to passive - the more everything loses value. Moon goo is a perfect example of how something for nothing is bad for the game. Pilots that can't see 3 years down the road are proffering ideas for deployables that salvage and so forth. The same can be said for faction and DED modules. A faction fit ship used to be a rare, expensive and powerful thing. The LP stores and caldari navy gear (just picked one for example) means everyone gets faction gear at a fraction of what it used to be. Same w/ null bears lobbying for anoms. There used to be 3 x-type boosters and 1 x-type armor repper on sale in Jita - that was rare poop at a premium price. Now there are price wars and market manipulations on that stuff. Faction BS used to cost 1B isk (give or take) and they were rare. Now I have stacks of them and they are dirt cheap. My point. If you want to ***** about modules and their priceing - lobby for a fix that will actually add value to the modules/market/game. Tweaking a few stats treats the symptoms. You need to go after the disease. If CCP wants to balance modules they first have to get the productions stream (from resource gathering to market hub shelf) under control. There is little point to wasting resources on balancing and providing strata for a family of modules if there is no real cost difference to force cost vs performance decisions. Right now it's basically (for pvp) fit t2. If you have cpu/grid issues put on faction. That's messed up. TL/DR: CCP needs to slowly draw down the meta and faction drops to put some ACTUAL VALUE differences between the modules or no amount of balancing tweaks will mean anything. They should do this without telling us or putting it in any patch notes (market manipulation reasons)
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2960	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:04:57 - [117] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: Are you at a point to which you will be able to show us some new stats? Nothing yet. Aegis and sov have taken priority for now. I'll make sure to post an update when there's more information. Understandable, Thank you for the update. Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1309	Posted - 2015.07.15 14:10:56 - [118] - Quote Serendipity Lost wrote: If CCP wants to balance modules they first have to get the productions stream (from resource gathering to market hub shelf) under control. There is little point to wasting resources on balancing and providing strata for a family of modules if there is no real cost difference to force cost vs performance decisions. Right now it's basically (for pvp) fit t2. If you have cpu/grid issues put on faction. That's messed up. TL/DR: CCP needs to slowly draw down the meta and faction drops to put some ACTUAL VALUE differences between the modules or no amount of balancing tweaks will mean anything. They should do this without telling us or putting it in any patch notes (market manipulation reasons) Agree with this. I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 290	Posted - 2015.07.15 17:25:41 - [119] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module. As far as I know that's been talked about as an actual plan for the future, or some variant of it. Making T1 more valuable as a manufacturing component and tying the meta prices to the t1 modules. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2960	Posted - 2015.07.15 17:35:25 - [120] - Quote CCP Terminus, are we going to see new faction and meta modules for everything that does not have a meta and or faction variation of it? For example Data and Relic analyzers? Roleplaying Trinkets for Explorers and Collectors

FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1312	Posted - 2015.07.15 18:11:23 - [121] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module. As far as I know that's been talked about as an actual plan for the future, or some variant of it. Making T1 more valuable as a manufacturing component and tying the meta prices to the t1 modules. Yes, please! That will be awesome! Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Luscius Uta 152	Posted - 2015.07.15 18:41:05 - [122] - Quote Shield flux coils were the worst modules in EVE by a long margin, as there was no viable fit where they would prove useful and people who want a passive shield tank would just use shield power relays instead. In fact, shield flux coilswere so bad that I literally never seen them on any killmail (not even on those noobfits that make me lose faith in humanity - I'm talking about mixed guns, dual/triple tank and a bunch of storyline modules). Meaning that even those noobs know that those modules are (other word for feces)! I look at the new stats and they make me wonder if the person responsible for this tiericide is actually playing EVE (I'm no fan of Fozzie, but he would do a far better work here) or has any clue about how passive shield tanking works. There was obviously no thought involved in the new stats, and that counts for rechargers and power relays as well. Therefore, I think that shield flux coils need a complete redesign (new bonuses, penalties, or both), I'm giving few suggestions so your brain doesn't melt: -reduce cycle time or capacitor use of shield boosters -give bonus to shield resistances (since Invulnerability fields don'thave a passive variant) -change the penalty to reducing capacitor amount, but nerf the recharge bonus to be the same as on shield power relays of the same metalevel
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 594	Posted - 2015.07.15 19:38:03 - [123] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: Release Plan As previously stated, these changes have no current release plan. They are unlikely to be released in the Aegis release in July, but are more likely to come out in the release after that. There are a lot of modules in the game - at this rate, it is going to take you several decades to finish the first pass of module tiericide. You really need to be grinding through 10, 20, or more, modules per release, if you want to make any real headway - otherwise, module rebalancing cannot keep up with any ongoing ship rebalancing and will always be woefully out-of-date. I suggest that you stop spending weeks to fine tune each module, one-by-one, to every possible ship configuration, and just work out a set of rough changes for all modules, based on the existing T2 module stats. For the first pass, focus on renaming and removing metas - leaving the T1 meta 0, T2 and faction versions, as is. This should not affect the overall game balance, yet allow you to quickly remove the excess unused metas and rename the remaining metas. For the second pass, examine the relative T1 meta 0 vs T2 strength of each module and set a more-or-less constant ratio for all modules - with T2 perhaps 20% stronger on stats and 10% worse on fitting. Adjust the T1 meta 0 values (not the T2 version values) according to the ratio, and simply linear interpolate the meta version values between the T1 meta 0 and T2 version values - again, this should not affect the overall game balance and can be quickly done. Something similar can be done to faction versions, setting a more-or-less constant ratio, relative to the T2 versions. The point of these two passes is to quickly adjust all of the modules, without upsetting overall game balance. Effectively, at this point, the "tiericide" part would be complete and you can focus solely on rebalancing modules, which is the part which entails the most feedback from players and thus takes the most time. This should go much faster, though, since you will have already removed the excess metas and set up a new baseline of relative strengths between T1 meta 0 and T2, from which to work.
Freelancer117 so you want to be a Hero 305	Posted - 2015.07.17 09:20:33 - [124] - Quote Hardly anyone will use faction mods over tech 2 mods, with such a minimum difference, make them a little bit better plz The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
Ms Michigan Aviation Professionals for EVE The Ditanian Alliance 66	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:44:21 - [125] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module. As far as I know that's been talked about as an actual plan for the future, or some variant of it. Making T1 more valuable as a manufacturing component and tying the meta prices to the t1 modules. As a player that started EVE in science and industry purely, - THIS T1 usage is horrible these days and prices worse. If you want to give the indy/science people something to do (to produce more en masse/bulk), especially for hisec bro's starting out - then please implement this. It will only help CCP control and monitor the abundance (ISK FAUCET) of minerals too and will make mining (running grav anoms) more popular and encourage people to venture into null/low/WH Space in either a permanent, semi-permanent, or ninja fashion which is better for everyone. EVE has a huge gap trying to get players to their first MILLION ISK and then to their first billion so they can feel competent venturing out and losing ships. Most players never make that transition from newb (first 30 days) to beyond because they don't feel like there is something they can do to earn money in relative predictable results like in real life. For those trolls that would now flame about care-bears etc etc, again, as many have countered - EVE NEEDS THEM. And they won't STAY carebears venturing out in favor of lower producing costs in null, due to the industry revamp and the SOV bonuses to mining and industry in null etc...etc... Again - predictability....diversity. Having players manufacture T1 for something other than the few people who are dumb enough to use it, will always be a good thing. /Ms Michigan Continuous player since 20o7
Ms Michigan Aviation Professionals for EVE The Ditanian Alliance 66	Posted - 2015.07.18 02:46:56 - [126] - Quote Luscius Uta wrote: Shield flux coils were the worst modules in EVE by a long margin, as there was no viable fit where they would prove useful and people who want a passive shield tank would just use shield power relays instead. In fact, shield flux coilswere so bad that I literally never seen them on any killmail (not even on those noobfits that make me lose faith in humanity - I'm talking about mixed guns, dual/triple tank and a bunch of storyline modules). Meaning that even those noobs know that those modules are (other word for feces)! I look at the new stats and they make me wonder if the person responsible for this tiericide is actually playing EVE (I'm no fan of Fozzie, but he would do a far better work here) or has any clue about how passive shield tanking works. There was obviously no thought involved in the new stats, and that counts for rechargers and power relays as well. Therefore, I think that shield flux coils need a complete redesign (new bonuses, penalties, or both), I'm giving few suggestions so your brain doesn't melt: -reduce cycle time or capacitor use of shield boosters -give bonus to shield resistances (since Invulnerability fields don'thave a passive variant) -change the penalty to reducing capacitor amount, but nerf the recharge bonus to be the same as on shield power relays of the same metalevel Agreed as well...shield flux coils and shield rechargers (anything having to do with passive shields) need some high-level DEV BRAINSTORMING. Either GIVE US HULLS THAT GET BONUSES TO PASSIVE SHIELD RECHARGE RATE (like Minnie do to Active shield boosts).... or CHANGE THE MODULE. Quit limping this one along.... WHERE IS FOZZIE and RISE ON THIS ONE?
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2591	Posted - 2015.07.19 09:28:17 - [127] - Quote Wow, some incursion neckbeard has a view on this beyond "Can we haz Officer SPR plzthx"?? Amazing, but it's still a bit harsh saying Fozzie would do a better job of this. Sizeof Void does make a good point about the need to push through with tiercides every patch. But i think he's overdoing it a bit saying it will take too long. Remember, the last MWD and AB tiercide was the second swing of the axe on those modules. I think CCP Terminus has a difficult job with the SPR's and Flux Coils because they are a niche use item, and they are items which are useful only when the maths stack up. This is not true of extenders, plates, warp disruptors or EWAR modules in the same way at all. You don't get in a position where you stick enough EANM's on a Geddon and it works fine, but if you swap EANM's for Layered membranes it doesn't. I think i've laid out the maths and the possible choices fairly efficiently, above. Flux Coils cannot compete with SPR's. if you make hem work like an SPR more, they begin moving to compete with Rechargers. You can't make rechargers compete with SPR's by buffing them too much more, or they will begin getting out of control or invalidate SPR's entirely. It's a three way balancing act with no real trade-offs to be made, and the optimal solution is, realistically, to drop flux coils. Here's an interesting link to give you an idea of flux coils usefulness. In the whole of EVE, only 5 ships a day die with a flux coil on board, and of those, very few have them fitted, with many being loot. They are useless, everyone knows it, so just remove them and balance SPR's and Rechargers against each other, or change the mechanism of the module entirely to some other effect on shields, eg; an active cap to shield converter Likewise, in the armour sphere, layered membranes are kind of in the same posiion. Only in some extreme edge cases like supers using Officer layered membranes is a raw 15% EHP bonus worth it. And even then, you probably don't even have a use because supers and titans have plenty of buffer, and reps work on resists. So, basically useless. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
allfonso Hekard Boa Innovations Phoenix Company Alliance 0	Posted - 2015.07.19 20:58:38 - [128] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: FT Diomedes wrote: I would also recommend adjusting it so that the meta and faction modules no longer drop. Instead, have the BPC for those items drop. Then have the build requirements for the meta or faction module require the T1 item as part of the build cost for the module. As far as I know that's been talked about as an actual plan for the future, or some variant of it. Making T1 more valuable as a manufacturing component and tying the meta prices to the t1 modules. - Please do this!
Sodamn In-sane Phorever People 7	Posted - 2015.07.23 09:40:08 - [129] - Quote really think you should fix the broken stuff in game first!. then give us pre promised changes fully before embarking on new nerfs to ship mods,i know you show the stats and lovely charts for these but in the end they will get nerfed so just bring out crap mods and leave them like they are! if your looking for more guys to work on these projects can i suggest CCP_Talks a Good Fight CCP_All Talk CCP_Empty Promises and ofc CCP_Disgruntled Subscriber Fozzie job change is good but you're still a muppet
Spugg Galdon Nisroc Angels 728	Posted - 2015.07.23 12:01:31 - [130] - Quote The simple problems with these modules is that they just aren't extreme enough. They are so timid that they are not very useful. If these modules gave really good benefits with extreme drawbacks they would become useful, although situation. For example: Shield Power Relays currently reduce the Shield recharge time (increase shield HP/s gained) at the cost of increased Capacitor recharge time (decrease in capacitor points per second gained). This is all good however, it's easy to get a similar end result from just maximizing your shield hitpoints and fitting PDU's instead which also increase your total shield HP, Shield HP/s and Cap recharge rate. I feel that the goal with SPR's should be to create a ship with very good shield recharge which then struggles to use any other active modules. So increase both the shield recharge bonus and the cap recharge penalty. Shield Flux Coils currently reduce the Shield recharge time (increase shield HP/s gained) at the cost of shield hitpoints. This is a good concept however the application (via the numbers) is poor. This module should be extreme in nature in order for it to be competitive with SPR's. This would mean that SFC's would give a very fast shield recharge rate however leave the ship with very few shield HPs and so vulnerable to alpha strikes. Would this not make these modules actually useful and give very different but also similar end results from either ?

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1186	Posted - 2015.07.23 15:50:48 - [131] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: The simple problems with these modules is that they just aren't extreme enough. They are so timid that they are not very useful. If these modules gave really good benefits with extreme drawbacks they would become useful, although situation. For example: Shield Power Relays currently reduce the Shield recharge time (increase shield HP/s gained) at the cost of increased Capacitor recharge time (decrease in capacitor points per second gained). This is all good however, it's easy to get a similar end result from just maximizing your shield hitpoints and fitting PDU's instead which also increase your total shield HP, Shield HP/s and Cap recharge rate. I feel that the goal with SPR's should be to create a ship with very good shield recharge which then struggles to use any other active modules. So increase both the shield recharge bonus and the cap recharge penalty. Shield Flux Coils currently reduce the Shield recharge time (increase shield HP/s gained) at the cost of shield hitpoints. This is a good concept however the application (via the numbers) is poor. This module should be extreme in nature in order for it to be competitive with SPR's. This would mean that SFC's would give a very fast shield recharge rate however leave the ship with very few shield HPs and so vulnerable to alpha strikes. Would this not make these modules actually useful and give very different but also similar end results from either ? its kind of indicative of CCP in general is too make tiny barely noticeable changes a dozen times (looks at still OP ishtar in particular) instead of 1 or 2 well thought out big changes. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Bobb Bobbington The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 20	Posted - 2015.07.25 15:27:05 - [132] - Quote So, which modules are getting merged into one another, and how do you tell?
Do Little Red Frog Freight Red-Frog 69	Posted - 2015.08.03 10:48:50 - [133] - Quote I use passive shield tanking for PVE and have been following this thread with interest. I like the changes to the Meta variants of the power relays - a clear choice between CPU and capacitor and a meaningful difference. I do not like the change to the T2. It either needs to be better to justify the substantially higher fitting requirement or leave it as is. Leaving the T2 alone would widen the difference to the faction but the Caldari still seems under powered given the likely price premium. I'll join the chorus calling for elimination or a complete rethink of the flux coils - trading shield capacity for regen doesn't work. I've tried to think of an alternative - capacitor capacity for shield capacity gives an interesting option to the power relays but I'm not sure how well it would work. I'll also agree that the shield rechargers are quite useless in their current form. With all the wonderful options available for my mid-slots, why would I pick a shield recharger? As a test, I removed one of the two LSE's on my passively tanked Gila and replaced it with a shield recharger II - my passive regen dropped from 341 dps with the second extender to 274 dps with the recharger! What might work is combining the flux coil and the recharger into a low slot module with higher fitting requirements and a lower bonus than the power relay but with no drawback. Not sure what my Beta Reactor Control Shield Power relays are going to turn into but I bought a few Type-D at ridiculously low prices - obviously a lot of people not reading this thread!
McChicken Combo HalfMayo The Happy Meal 988	Posted - 2015.08.07 00:39:24 - [134] - Quote The Shield Flux Coils can work, they just need to be worth it. Losing that many shield hitpoints is not acceptable if you can get the same gains by instead losing capacitor (on a passive fit). The Shield Flux Coil is only worth using if it outdoes the Shield Power Relay. As for Shield Rechargers... delete. Not every stat needs to have a corresponding module in mid and low slots. There are all our dominion Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony 12	Posted - 2015.08.07 05:07:21 - [135] - Quote On a side note. Why can we not mix active and passive shield tanking, in such a way that both "sustainable DPS" and "peak boosting" become relevant? It is because we have Shield Boost Amplifiers on one hand, and Shield Rechargers on the other. Leading to (I speak for myself) me not using either. I always have something better to do with my precious mids than to fit a boost amplifier or a recharger -- in fact I'm hard pressed to find any free mids for tank so it boils down to either an ancillary booster or a shield extender. (active or buffer). I do not know where you guys find these free mids, but I'm looking at Scram, Web, Propmod and maybe a Tracking computer/Dampener/Whatever useful and unique module I fancy. MAYBE. That's three - four midslots and I haven't even fitted ANY tank yet. With a bit of luck I have 1 more midslots for tank. Ancillary booster of course, or maybe a shield extender. Most certainly no regular Shield Booster because that would require a Cap Booster (also a midslot) for sure. MWD and tackle ate all my cap. And if I drop my EWAR module/tracking computer, I might even fit an adaptive invul. A passive regen tank, however, can only be achieved by tossing EVERYTHING out the window -- forget about long/shortpoint, webs, computers, target painters; and forget about your gyrostabs too. Because EVERYTHING has to make way for an endless pile of small percentages leading eventually up to the ability to passively tank some DPS. Congratulations! Your ship is now completely useless. I do declare: one can either fit buffer/resist (with logistics) or an ancillary (skirmish) tank. Anything else is plain rubbish that ends up on the wrong end of the killmail, utterly incapable of defending itself against anything except NPC rats. ....now, imagine what could happen if a Shield Boost amplifier not only assisted in active boosting, but also granted a de facto shield recharge rate bonus? Perhaps every once in a blue moon, somebody would actually fit a boost amplifier rather than a shield extender? And let's go completely nuts and picture for awhile a lowslot equivalent that would buff shield (both passive AND active) recharge rate whilst taking a bit off the buffer; all of a sudden, active tankers might even appreciate a flux coil! I can see our Devs are struggling with a serious dilemma. A module that nobody uses; a module even they can't figure out what good it could possibly do or why anyone who did the math would fit it; yet the artwork is there, the items are on the market ... what to do with them? Well, fear not! Brokk solved it for you (donate any amount of ISK you deem appropriate). People active tank for a reason; and having several shield-related items that are not worthwhile unless fitting at least 10 of them in every low and mid you can muster, is a bad idea. Equally poor is the notion I would choose a Shield Boost Amplifier over a -30% all-round resist. Now, I don't know what you guys usually fly but where I come from, I simply don't have that number of slots to waste on tank. I can fit the one or the other, but not everything at the same time goddamnit! These items need a serious kick in the nuts to ensure that sacrificing a few slots yields tangible results. ALL of them is too high a price to pay. And so that we're clear: if it cuts my DPS or competes with necessary mids, it'd better be good. Not good "in combination with a couple of invulns and two or three shield extenders" -- nope: good in its own right.
Spugg Galdon Nisroc Angels FETID 735	Posted - 2015.08.07 07:25:15 - [136] - Quote I feel the modules that effect passive shield regeneration are just not attractive anymore simply because they are far too timid. These modules should be fairly extreme in there bonuses and drawbacks to be attractive alternatives. Shield Power Relays These modules are not far off the mark however increasing the shield Regeneration Bonus and the Cap Recharge Penalty would make them a more attractive module to fit. This way you end up with a strong shield regeneration but absolutely no capacitor recharge to support active modules like hardeners and propulsion. Shield Flux Coils These should be the mother of all "extreme" modules. This module should increase your shield recharge dramatically however the penalty to shield amount should also be dramatic. This way you end up with a shield tank that recharges very very fast however, it has very few hitpoints to survive a heavy alpha strike. Shield Re chargers. These modules are problematic in that they are essentially just "extra" to shield power relays. They are used currently to stack on top of SPR's to buff their usage which removes the rest of the ships utility. I would suggest redesigning Shield Re Chargers to change the way the shield recharge mechanics actually work. Currently, maximum shield recharge rate occurs at 25% shield capacity. Shield rechargers could increase this to a higher level and increase the gap between "max shield recharge" and "shields broken". Currently, if you break a passive shield tank (I think this happens at around 15-20%) the passive recharge drops. If shield rechargers increased the point at which max regeneration occured it would create a "safer" passive shield tank. My two cents anyway
commander aze Sub--Zero 72	Posted - 2015.08.19 22:39:24 - [137] - Quote No love for armor? ... Shields are already easy to use in my opinion even too easy and overpowered. Considering the down sides armor recieves when it comes to speed/mass and not passively recharging... in addition to the shield boost amp of which armor doesnt have an equivalent. .. Its ok im sure we can get to armor at some point in time... Or fix amarr ships so that they can fire guns and use reps... the revelation. .. one day it will be of use Commander Aze For CSM 10
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 252	Posted - 2015.08.19 23:42:25 - [138] - Quote commander aze wrote: No love for armor? ... Shields are already easy to use in my opinion even too easy and overpowered. Considering the down sides armor recieves when it comes to speed/mass and not passively recharging... in addition to the shield boost amp of which armor doesnt have an equivalent. .. Its ok im sure we can get to armor at some point in time... Or fix amarr ships so that they can fire guns and use reps... the revelation. .. one day it will be of use Armour has three types of resistance modules. Four if you count the RAH. Shields only have two. Armour's second buffering module (Layering Membrane) is better than the shield's (PDS). Armour is fine. You just don't know how to use it.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2113	Posted - 2015.08.20 13:36:32 - [139] - Quote Can't they just un-link regen from buffer size and re-adjust regen value for some ship if needed? That would prevent the coils from being so self defeating.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3260	Posted - 2015.08.20 16:25:08 - [140] - Quote Is this not happening in Galatea? Post on the Eve-o forums with a Goonswarm Federation character that drinking bleach is bad for you, and 20 forum warriors will hospitalise themselves trying to prove you wrong.

Mikkir Freelance Mining Company 10	Posted - 2015.08.20 18:41:59 - [141] - Quote I'll just join the chorus and and say that if I EFT a ship and it includes a shield flux or a shield recharger I know I did something wrong. The shield flux just don't pay off when you consider that max shield hp is so important so you don't get knocked past your max recharge point, and shield rechargers are just very weak for the bonus they provide and you should fiddle with your fit until you can get a hardener or another extender before using one.
Faelune Tous Pour Un 13	Posted - 2015.08.29 13:03:42 - [142] - Quote All those modules consume too many capacitors and give light renforcement without counterpart. Anyone who know how it works will choose the offensive way by fitting dps, and to skill the ship, to skill the hull and to skill the natural armor despite the shielding. therefore the shielding is only good for all drones. Some exception can be provide by some fregateers inside some records from burners missions. But it implies certificates 5 for all aspect of one type of fregate.
Arthur Aihaken Chig 4604	Posted - 2015.08.30 11:47:59 - [143] - Quote Any idea when the tentative release date for these is? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery Prolapse. 2719	Posted - 2015.08.30 14:19:56 - [144] - Quote Brokk Witgenstein wrote: Leading to (I speak for myself) me not using either. I always have something better to do with my precious mids than to fit a boost amplifier or a recharger -- in fact I'm hard pressed to find any free mids for tank so it boils down to either an ancillary booster or a shield extender. (active or buffer). I do not know where you guys find these free mids, but I'm looking at Scram, Web, Propmod and maybe a Tracking computer/Dampener/Whatever useful and unique module I fancy. MAYBE. That's three - four midslots and I haven't even fitted ANY tank yet. With a bit of luck I have 1 more midslots for tank. Ancillary booster of course, or maybe a shield extender. Most certainly no regular Shield Booster because that would require a Cap Booster (also a midslot) for sure. MWD and tackle ate all my cap. And if I drop my EWAR module/tracking computer, I might even fit an adaptive invul. [Lachesis, Heavy Tackle] Damage Control II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Warp Scrambler II 10MN Monopropellant Enduring Afterburner Pith B-Type Large Shield Booster Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Medium Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 800 Shield Boost Amplifier II Shield Boost Amplifier II Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Medium Core Defense Capacitor Safeguard II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Hammerhead II x5 Shut up and let the real men talk. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony The Wraithguard. 16	Posted - 2015.08.30 15:01:45 - [145] - Quote Your point? Fail lachesis is supposed to convince me of anything? Edit: "fail" in the sense that your Recon is supposed to fit EWAR / bonused points. Yours does not. Obviously you have free mids under those circumstances -- because you're abusing the vessel's purpose.
Media freak His Majesty's Privateers Warden. 2	Posted - 2015.08.30 15:28:17 - [146] - Quote Brokk Witgenstein wrote: Your point? Fail lachesis is supposed to convince me of anything? Edit: "fail" in the sense that your Recon is supposed to fit EWAR / bonused points. Yours does not. Obviously you have free mids under those circumstances -- because you're abusing the vessel's purpose. Warp Scrambler II what's this then?
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony The Wraithguard. 16	Posted - 2015.08.30 17:14:35 - [147] - Quote Look, I'll humour you one more time. Guy links a recon, with lots of mids. Guy has a shortpoint - great. Don't we all? Did I not say so in my own post? What I fail to see, is WHY he links this Lachesis, what he's trying to prove or what it has to do with anything. Random guy was also rude in a 17 yo fashion, so I didn't feel a need to elaborate or put any genuine effort in replying. The fact he has to come up with a recon already proves the point: most vessels do not have sufficient mids to make use of multiple stacked shield modules to finally make it work. It took him no less than 4 (four!) mids to fit his tank, on top of a rig and a capbooster (another mid) just to resolve the cap issues. And this is supposed to invalidate my point about ancillary boosters? This is supposed to invalidate the fact you need more than 4 mids to have any shield tanking options at all? I didn't think so. What I'm looking at, is an expensive close-range brawler -- with AB and no web I might add, so quite vulnerable to being tackled and shot by a T1 cruiser / interceptor himself. I called fail at first glace and I call fail now. He certainly sounds awfully sure about both his fitting skills and his manhood, but showing me a fit with 4-5 mids dedicated to tank, 2 rigs also dedicated to tank on a 200 mil recon to do a T1 cruiser's job only serves to illustrate the case I presented earlier. I guess I should thank him for that.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 595	Posted - 2015.08.31 20:42:04 - [148] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Any idea when the tentative release date for these is? It looks like CCP has dropped the ball on Module Tiericide. There has been no dev response on this thread for 6 weeks, and it has been over two months since they supposedly started work on rebalancing shield rechargers et al. Even allowing for player feedback, this set of changes should have taken only a couple of weeks, at most, to finish up - it requires no code changes nor graphics changes; just a few simple changes to the database. And, there have been no dev posts for Module Tiericide changes to other modules, afaik I think that CCP needs a release schedule for Module Tiericide - there are a lot of modules in the game which still need work and CCP hasn't even gotten to the tougher ones yet. If they can't push out at least one set of Module Tiericide changes per each release, it is going to take decades to get done... if ever.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2156	Posted - 2015.09.01 20:04:17 - [149] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: Any idea when the tentative release date for these is? It looks like CCP has dropped the ball on Module Tiericide. There has been no dev response on this thread for 6 weeks, and it has been over two months since they supposedly started work on rebalancing shield rechargers et al. Even allowing for player feedback, this set of changes should have taken only a couple of weeks, at most, to finish up - it requires no code changes nor graphics changes; just a few simple changes to the database. And, there have been no dev posts for Module Tiericide changes to other modules, afaik I think that CCP needs a release schedule for Module Tiericide - there are a lot of modules in the game which still need work and CCP hasn't even gotten to the tougher ones yet. If they can't push out at least one set of Module Tiericide changes per each release, it is going to take decades to get done... if ever. They put in a new SOV system and made tweaks to it while going through the traditional vacation period. Could it possibly have affected the release of tiericide on some mods who are arguably in need of some redesign anyway?
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 722	Posted - 2015.09.01 20:43:37 - [150] - Quote Since when is using a Lach as heavy tackle not using it's strengths? Last I checked it got a bonus to range on Warp Scram and Disrupters.

Media freak His Majesty's Privateers Warden. 2	Posted - 2015.09.01 21:25:45 - [151] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Since when is using a Lach as heavy tackle not using it's strengths? Last I checked it got a bonus to range on Warp Scram and Disrupters. since he was trying to make a point. I mean that scram is only tackling things at 18km without links or OH. 21km with OH and 28 with links and OH. I mean its guns only go out to 18km which is null including falloff.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 596	Posted - 2015.09.03 02:07:14 - [152] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: They put in a new SOV system and made tweaks to it while going through the traditional vacation period. Could it possibly have affected the release of tiericide on some mods who are arguably in need of some redesign anyway? Not likely. Changes to shield rechargers et al would certainly not have any direct effect on the new FozzieSov system. And, unless the whole team went on vacation together for 6 weeks, that is probably not a valid excuse, either. Technically speaking, Module Tiericide involves rather simple database changes. A single database programmer can typically implement these sorts of changes with a few lines of database code - not more than a couple of hours work, at most. Also, Module Tiericide is not supposed to be about "redesign", but, rather, simply reducing complexity by removing unnecessary metas. Sure, there is going to be some minor rebalancing involved, but it isn't meant to be extensive or comprehensive - certainly, they have done absoultely nothing to address the continued worthlessness of many T1 meta 0 modules, in previous Module Tiericide passes, and have repeated stated that the tiericided modules will be revisited for rebalancing in the future. Thus, it is also unlikely that this particular pass of Module Tiericide needs extensively more redesign work and/or discussion. I think it is much more likely that the devs who were supposed to be working on Module Tiericide were pulled off to do other work (or left the company) and, as a result, no one is currently working on it. Which is why I said that it looked like CCP had dropped the ball on Module Tiericide. I'd be more than happy to see a response from a dev to prove me wrong, along with a release date for this round of Module Tiericide changes and a rough schedule for the rest of Module Tiericide. :)
Tyranis Marcus Bloody Heathens 1447	Posted - 2015.09.05 21:26:47 - [153] - Quote I have to say, I was really opposed to module tiericide from the beginning. Everything about it. Now that I've finally gotten in some decent playtime, reworked some old fits, and made up some new fits, I really like what you guys are doing. Not sure how it affects the newbro market, but from where I'm sitting things are looking pretty nice. The meaningful options that were mentioned are definitely there. And...with that, the loss of the old names doesn't even really sting, anymore. Do not run. We are your friends.
Do Little Red Frog Freight Red-Frog 153	Posted - 2015.09.06 08:32:14 - [154] - Quote The fact that these changes didn't ship with Galatea suggests that CCP is rethinking these modules and we'll likely see more than minor tweaks to the stats. I consider this a good sign but think they should release the power relays in Vanguard and set the Flux Coils and Rechargers aside while they try to figure out a legitimate role for them.
Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 151	Posted - 2015.09.06 09:12:30 - [155] - Quote Brokk Witgenstein wrote: What I'm looking at, is an expensive close-range brawler -- with AB and no web I might add, so quite vulnerable to being tackled and shot by a T1 cruiser plus interceptor himself. I called fail at first glace and I call fail now. He certainly sounds awfully sure about both his fitting skills and his manhood, but showing me a fit with 4-5 mids dedicated to tank, 2 rigs also dedicated to tank on a 200 mil recon to do a T1 cruiser's job only serves to illustrate the case I presented earlier. I guess I should thank him for that. D-scan immunity, bonused scram range, tech 2 resists, better sustain tank and reasonable Dps Plus a knowledge of where said pilot flys I can tell you this is a gank lach for w-space. In this situation he needs to take on the target (he would probs utilise a warpin to get into scram range) and the sleepers on grid, which can be upwards of 700dps in a C3 just from the site Asb would not have enough sustain to keep the lach alive to allow him to kill the target or hold on long enough for backup to arrive. A buffer tank would fair even worse. In the scenario that he would use this ship damps would have no use, a web would have use and there is argument to have one but his choice is perfectly acceptable. No a t1 cruiser could not do this job, a ceptor maybe but it's harder, the main advantage is the dscan immunity so the target doesn't know you are there until he is on grid. (We used to use arazus for this but the lach does it better) (Omg I can't believe I'm sticking up for trinkets) So Much Space
Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery 2744	Posted - 2015.09.20 01:06:40 - [156] - Quote Thats because you looked at it (maybe even looked that i have used it - and to great effect) and used your logics. Brokk just assumes that spending 4 slots on tank is bad. Believe me, we have tried tackling rattlesnakes with cruisers, and there's not much at all besides the Lachesis which does this job as well as it. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Chance Ravinne WiNGSPAN Delivery Services The WINGSPAN Logo Alliance 492	Posted - 2015.09.20 20:37:03 - [157] - Quote I'd like to see tiericide move forward, just hoping it will be soon. You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Zappity the 57th Overlanders Brigade A Band Apart. 2457	Posted - 2015.09.20 20:40:57 - [158] - Quote I think they have been sidelined. Unfortunate. At this rate it will take literally years. The current mixture is confusing for new players. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 4655	Posted - 2015.09.20 22:39:18 - [159] - Quote Chance Ravinne wrote: I'd like to see tiericide move forward, just hoping it will be soon. Did this come up at the summit at all? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 496	Posted - 2015.09.21 00:04:11 - [160] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: god, can you get to the actual relevant modules like turrets, tackle mods, ewar? who actually cares about these. or forget the whole thing and do some ship rebalancing, stuff that'll actually fix the game. no kidding. these bearing changes are about 5 ************** years to late. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

Trinkets friend Sudden Buggery 2745	Posted - 2015.09.21 01:26:06 - [161] - Quote Just a thought.... Why not Flux Coils give you a percentage bonus to shield hitpoints? Currently there's no real point in passive tanking capitals. If your flux coils gave a 10% HP bonus you could do some pretty hinky stuff with passive tanked Wyverns. Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA ~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 297	Posted - 2015.09.21 01:38:54 - [162] - Quote Trinkets friend wrote: Just a thought.... Why not Flux Coils give you a percentage bonus to shield hitpoints? Currently there's no real point in passive tanking capitals. If your flux coils gave a 10% HP bonus you could do some pretty hinky stuff with passive tanked Wyverns. The PDS does that already. You're either going to compete with that module for the same job (which creates redunancy) or be outright better than the PDS which will likely result in the buffed coils being OP.
Sieonigh Global Defense Initiative Cartel Sorry We're In Your Space Eh 47	Posted - 2015.09.21 08:28:11 - [163] - Quote Rawketsled wrote: Trinkets friend wrote: Just a thought.... Why not Flux Coils give you a percentage bonus to shield hitpoints? Currently there's no real point in passive tanking capitals. If your flux coils gave a 10% HP bonus you could do some pretty hinky stuff with passive tanked Wyverns. The PDS does that already. You're either going to compete with that module for the same job (which creates redunancy) or be outright better than the PDS which will likely result in the buffed coils being OP. not nessisarily, PDSs do more that just shild HP and shild regen, its also grid + cap amount + cap regen which is roughly 5% for each. so having say 10% and 10% for shild capasity and regen isn't a bad idea, question is whether or not it would break shild capitals.
Rawketsled Generic Corp Name 297	Posted - 2015.09.21 08:40:17 - [164] - Quote They'd need a stacking penalty. Three of those modules increases regen by 85%.

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 345	Posted - 2015.09.29 11:53:57 - [165] - Quote So a little update. These module changes are now set to go out in the December release. We're still mulling over ideas for the Shield Flux Coils, and I'll post another update when there is more information on that. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc 1970	Posted - 2015.09.29 12:08:30 - [166] - Quote Well, its definitely a good thing to see you considering other ideas than just leaving the modules "as is", and quickly forgetting about them Kudos for that. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Retired Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - Ex-BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1124	Posted - 2015.09.29 13:10:51 - [167] - Quote turret tiericide when

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 346	Posted - 2015.09.29 13:20:55 - [168] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: turret tiericide when The December release should have a decent amount of module tiericide in it. This may include tiericide on turrets I'm not sure. Either way it's unlikely I will be doing it, you're better off mentioning it to one of the other module tiericide members (CCP Fozzie, CCP Delegate Zero, CCP Rise, or CCP Larrikin). @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Bobb Bobbington The Cult of the Rare Pepes 54	Posted - 2015.09.29 19:23:11 - [169] - Quote Which modules are to be folded into each new type?
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 45	Posted - 2015.09.29 19:44:24 - [170] - Quote CCP Terminus wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: turret tiericide when The December release should have a decent amount of module tiericide in it. This may include tiericide on turrets I'm not sure. Either way it's unlikely I will be doing it, you're better off mentioning it to one of the other module tiericide members (CCP Fozzie, CCP Delegate Zero, CCP Rise, or CCP Larrikin). Are they the only four working on tiericide? Has there been any discussion about the slow pace of tiericide? A lot of us consider it to be very important to improving the game both for newer and older players. 4 module groups every 2-4 months leaves us with a 2019 finish date for full tiericide. Has there been any consideration to massively buffing these passive shield modules, so stacking penalties can make 2 of them in the lows instead of ballistic controls a viable pvp choice with a single invuln/extender tank. Rather than having to all in with every module slot in order to make them viable. (Penalties allows 1 or 2 to make a big difference while 6-9 are meaningless wastes of slots ). What about flux coils being +total hitpoints - hp/s recharge?


CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 347	Posted - 2015.09.30 10:51:53 - [171] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: CCP Terminus wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: turret tiericide when The December release should have a decent amount of module tiericide in it. This may include tiericide on turrets I'm not sure. Either way it's unlikely I will be doing it, you're better off mentioning it to one of the other module tiericide members (CCP Fozzie, CCP Delegate Zero, CCP Rise, or CCP Larrikin). Are they the only four working on tiericide? Has there been any discussion about the slow pace of tiericide? A lot of us consider it to be very important to improving the game both for newer and older players. 4 module groups every 2-4 months leaves us with a 2019 finish date for full tiericide. Has there been any consideration to massively buffing these passive shield modules, so stacking penalties can make 2 of them in the lows instead of ballistic controls a viable pvp choice with a single invuln/extender tank. Rather than having to all in with every module slot in order to make them viable. (Penalties allows 1 or 2 to make a big difference while 6-9 are meaningless wastes of slots ). What about flux coils being +total hitpoints - hp/s recharge? Well along with me that makes 5, which is a decent portion of the designers working on EVE. Unfortunately module tiericide is not a primary focus of anyone at the moment, so it's basically done when we have the time between major projects. The good news is I would expect the December and possibly January to be heavier in tiericide, which will somewhat make up for the lack of it these past few releases. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters


CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 347	Posted - 2015.09.30 14:39:36 - [172] - Quote Bobb Bobbington wrote: Which modules are to be folded into each new type? Shield Rechargers Meta 1-4 wil become the M51 'Benefactor' Compact Shield Recharger Shield Power Relays All the Meta 0 modules except for the Shield Power Relay I will be combined into the 'Basic' Shield Power Relay Meta 1-4 will be combined into the two Meta modules which remain. We usually (though not always) have 1 and 3 be a module, and 2 and 4 be the other Shield Flux Coils Same thing will happen as the Shield Power Relays, meta 0's merged, meta 1-4 merged into 2 modules @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters

Sabriz Adoudel Black Hydra Consortium. 5380	Posted - 2015.10.01 01:27:06 - [173] - Quote So the only role of the tech 1 (meta 0) items is to add more clicks to the manufacturing process for tech 2 modules? Still? This was bad design the first time you made this mistake and it remains bad design now. I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com Sabriz's Rule: "Any time someone argues for a game change claiming it is a quality of life change, the change is actually a game balance change".
Daimus Daranius Viziam Amarr Empire 21	Posted - 2015.10.01 10:48:32 - [174] - Quote Shield flux coils need to go back to the drawing board, since there's literally zero use for them. People who passive shield tank always use shield power relays instead as shield flux coils will actually hurt your HP recharge rate. Here's a few suggestions: -Replace shield recharge bonus with reduction of capacitor use of shield boosters -Replace shield amount penalty with signature radius penalty Amarr Victor!
Morihei Akachi Nishida Corporation 181	Posted - 2015.10.06 03:02:19 - [175] - Quote Don't suppose you'd consider calling them something different? It's just that I trash everything with "restrained" in its name. Seems like a waste of all your time and effort. "Enduring", "restrained" and "ample" as designations for starship components are foreign to the genre of high-tech science fiction and donGÇÖt belong in Eve Online.
Lugh Crow-Slave 1275	Posted - 2015.10.13 04:41:28 - [176] - Quote Trinkets friend wrote: Just a thought.... Why not Flux Coils give you a percentage bonus to shield hitpoints? Currently there's no real point in passive tanking capitals. If your flux coils gave a 10% HP bonus you could do some pretty hinky stuff with passive tanked Wyverns. I think it would be interesting but as said before they would need a stacking penaltie unlike the other mods Fuel block colors? Missiles for Caldari T3? Corp Stasis
Desiderya Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 1061	Posted - 2015.10.15 17:41:11 - [177] - Quote Seeing as shield flux coils are a bit useless, what about making them a module to modify active tanking? Such as reducing shield boost amount, activation cost and cycle time. It would mean faster but less chunky boosts. Not sure if that would be something folks would fit if it doesn't come with a small net increase to at least offset the heat issue. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance 215	Posted - 2015.10.16 19:20:44 - [178] - Quote this part of November or December patch?
Bad Messenger Rehabilitation Clinic Space Warriors 859	Posted - 2015.10.18 11:08:48 - [179] - Quote Altrue wrote: Shield rechargers need a massive boost! I'm surprised you've missed that one . They are competing with EM wards, Shield extenders, Invulns... There is little reason to fit them on passive tanked ships. Please reconsider their stats Shield Power Relays stats seem fine to me. Shield Flux Coils, I was expecting a massive boost as well, reduction of shield capacity is so opposed to passive shield tanking that there is currently no use for these modules. Not with such stats. You should buff them quite extensively, or swap their penalty for something else perhaps? Maybe more sig radius? Or less total Capacitor? Or less Powergrid? But something needs to change. Suggestion: What about a module that modifies the curve of shield regeneration to have the optimal regeneration start earlier and last longer? That would definitely be a nice addition to Shield Flux Coils or Shield Rechargers. Those modules have their marginal use in some out of the box fits. Example polarized gun fits etc...

CCP Terminus C C P C C P Alliance 430	Posted - 2015.10.19 04:21:56 - [180] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: this part of November or December patch? It should hopefully make it in to the December release. @CCP_Terminus // Game Designer // Team Size Matters


naed21 The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People 39	Posted - 2015.10.19 13:56:51 - [181] - Quote If they introduce a module that modifies the peak recharge, then there should be an indicator on the shield bar that shows where the peak recharge is.
Ix Method Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 475	Posted - 2015.10.20 14:44:00 - [182] - Quote Is there any good reason why Shield Rechargers still cost 30 CPU? Cap Rechargers have a place pretty much entirely because they're 15 CPU, something similar would at least widen their use from a bare handful of obscure fits into Burner Frigs, Low-End exploration, etc. where the strength/fitting balance might be worth the compromise. Travelling at the speed of love.
aldhura Bartledannians 8	Posted - 2015.10.29 17:38:30 - [183] - Quote Changes to the SPR's CPU requirement is going to kill the passive drake. Its already a tight fit. Bartledannians are recruiting.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6104254#post6104254
Lexx Devi EVE-INDY Alternate Allegiance 1	Posted - 2015.12.08 03:35:57 - [184] - Quote Reduce unnecessary complexity? Just call the Meta Shield module something like. "Takmicon sphere re-ionizer parel". That will help just as much as the new name.......... I like it, all tho i'd like to se Storyline verry mutch super specialized. *Example: Added effect, Peek effect at 0-25%% Shield HP, Not 25-50% that im guessing it is normally... Othen then absurdly complex names !!!Good Work!!!
Soltys 48	Posted - 2016.01.12 16:13:16 - [185] - Quote With the changes implemented as they are now, why would anyone ever want to use Shield Flux Coil II if one could use Compact or Restrained version ? The resulting final bonus is far too weak to waste 5-10 cpu more on it. Jita Flipping Inc.: Solmp / Kovl


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [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.