EVE Search - Sticky:[March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

Sticky:[March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13616	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:33:47 - [1] - Quote Friends, pilots, capsuleers, lend me your ears! Today we're ready to discuss a new module that we are planning on releasing in our March patch. I'm excited to see how you creative pilots take advantage of these new modules, especially solo/small gang Battleship pilots who should get a lot of value from them. The Heavy Stasis Grappler module is a new class of webifier that has high strength, low optimal and high falloff. It will be the first webifier-type module to make use of falloff, which will reduce the strength of the web effect as the range from target increases. This module can only be fit onto Battleships and Capitals, and just one per ship. It is a seperate group from existing Stasis Webifiers, and does not receive bonuses from any existing web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or strength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). The current planned stats are 1km optimal and 8km falloff for Tech 1, and 10km falloff for T2. Strength is extremely high, running from -80% on T1, -85% on T2, up to -88.75 on high-meta officer. We currently plan on converting existing officer webifiers into the officer versions of these new modules. The overheating of this module impacts optimal (not falloff) with a whooping 300% bonus, increasing optimal range from 1km to 4km. Here's the stats we currently have planned. Of course everything here is subject to change based on feedback from all of you. This module is scheduled for our March release (not the February release coming next Tuesday) so there'll be plenty of time for testing it out on SISI and providing feedback. TypeName CapNeed Duration CPU PWG Overheat% SpeedFactor Optimal Falloff MetaLevel Heavy Stasis Grappler I 4 2000 25 200 300 -80 1000 8000 0 Heavy Compact Stasis Grappler 4 2000 20 160 300 -82.5 1000 8000 1 Heavy Scoped Stasis Grappler 4 2000 25 200 300 -82.5 1000 9000 1 Heavy Enduring Stasis Grappler 2 2000 25 200 300 -82.5 1000 8000 1 Heavy Stasis Grappler II 5 2000 30 220 300 -85 1000 10000 5 Faction 1 Stasis Grappler 4 2000 25 130 300 -87 1000 11000 8 Faction 2 Stasis Grappler 4 2000 20 160 300 -86 1000 12000 8 Meta 11 Officer Stasis Grappler 12 2000 30 240 300 -88 1000 14000 11 Meta 13 Officer Stasis Grappler 13 2000 32 260 300 -88.25 1000 14500 13 Meta 15 Officer Stasis Grappler 14 2000 34 280 300 -88.5 1000 15000 15 Meta 17 Officer Stasis Grappler 15 2000 36 300 300 -88.75 1000 15500 17 Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

StarFleetCommander V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 301	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:34:35 - [2] - Quote 1st
Gorski Car 689	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:34:52 - [3] - Quote This is a great module that will help solo and small gang battleships greatly against the Svipul menance. Also solo tracking dreads)) Collect this post
big miker Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops 427	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:35:07 - [4] - Quote 3rd reserved Latest video: Ferocious 8.0 'Officer' Nightmare!
commander aze 73	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:35:22 - [5] - Quote I support this as a buff to battleships. Aze For CSM Commander Aze For CSM XI Support the Community #Broadcast4Reps
Sakurako Kimino Eternal Darkness. Blades of Grass 17	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:36:46 - [6] - Quote what slot is this mod? eve is about sin
Theronth Valarax V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 90	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:37:13 - [7] - Quote Looks good so far, will have to bust out EFT to have any more comments +1 Check out my Youtube channel
alchemist8 Reikoku Pandemic Legion 2	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:37:30 - [8] - Quote Hopefully this will improve smaller - medium gang Battleship Combat, which is awesome in my books.
Yvonne Chelien Grey Eagles 0	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:37:45 - [9] - Quote Duration of 2000s?
SEVISGEN Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 3	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:38:42 - [10] - Quote looks cool

Fifth Blade Jump Drive Appreciation Society 64	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:39:06 - [11] - Quote Can't wait to see what I can do with this on Solo BS fits.
Elizabeth Norn Nornir Research 810	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:39:06 - [12] - Quote The duration is in milliseconds, right? Two second web switches sounds pretty neat. WTS ME 10 TE 20 BPOs & BPO Packs WTS Collectible Large Rigged Small/Medium Ships

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13618	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:39:37 - [13] - Quote Sakurako Kimino wrote: what slot is this mod? Midslot. Yvonne Chelien wrote: Duration of 2000s? 2000ms, or 2s. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Tora Bushido EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective 3183	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:40:04 - [14] - Quote Sounds like a good plan to me... DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE ! Meta Gaming Level VII, Psycho Warfare Level X, Smack Talk Level VII. TORA BUSHIDO FOR CSM XI
Sakurako Kimino Eternal Darkness. Blades of Grass 17	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:42:12 - [15] - Quote looking at this i like it would like if the hic could also get it eve is about sin
Carbon Alabel The Alabaster Albatross Sev3rance 6	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:43:51 - [16] - Quote I'm not a huge fan of the name, but it looks pretty solid otherwise, except for one thing: how efficient will it be at falloff range? If the strength falls close to zero at falloff range, I don't really see this as a viable alternative to regular webs.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13618	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:45:40 - [17] - Quote Carbon Alabel wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the name, but it looks pretty solid otherwise, except for one thing: how efficient will it be at falloff range? If the strength falls close to zero at falloff range, I don't really see this as a viable alternative to regular webs. At optimal+1x falloff, they are half of full strength. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance 234	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:46:58 - [18] - Quote range is too low... fed navy web without bonuses is 60% at 14km / 18km. the meta 17 one listed here has 45% at 15.5 km... they need an extra 5km optimal before falloff
Favonius85 House Aratus Goonswarm Federation 28	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:50:14 - [19] - Quote It sounds like a cool module, but why convert current officer webs? The current Meta 11 Officer Web has better stats than the Meta 17 Grappler.
Alundil Isogen 5 1086	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:50:21 - [20] - Quote I think this is a cool module full of fun potential shenanigans. My only worry at the moment (due to pure paper conjecture) is that this will really neuter medium and small blaster ships whose optimals are well within the 4km OH range of these modules. Currently, getting under the guns on a battleship/capital is the key to survival for blaster ships. This module seems to affect them to the largest degree in terms of optimal ranges and usage. Time will tell if this is a real issue or not. I'm right behind you

Sean Crees Sean's Safe Haven 24	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:50:37 - [21] - Quote 1km optimal is a bit under the guns for such large weapon platforums. I know on my vindi, even if i double web something with 90% webs, and i have a hull bonus for tracking, i still have a hard time hitting small things that are only 1km away.
Niraia Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 389	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:51:54 - [22] - Quote This doesn't make me want to take a battleship out to play any more than faction webs do, and I'm very disappointed that you think otherwise. GÖÑ
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2792	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:52:21 - [23] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: range is too low... fed navy web without bonuses is 60% at 14km / 18km. the meta 17 one listed here has 45% at 15.5 km... they need an extra 5km optimal before falloff So your idea for good game design is to turn every Battleship and Cap/Super into a Vindicator. Glad you didn't quit your day job. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Hairpins Blueprint The Northerners Northern Coalition. 177	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:53:24 - [24] - Quote 1 km is kinda short since most BS guns have bigge optimal and low tracking. So it will be super hard to get the benefit due to low tracking. It should be 9 km optimal 16 falloff on t2. so battleships can acctualy use the benefit of the new WEB ......
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2792	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:53:27 - [25] - Quote Sean Crees wrote: 1km optimal is a bit under the guns for such large weapon platforums. I know on my vindi, even if i double web something with 90% webs, and i have a hull bonus for tracking, i still have a hard time hitting small things that are only 1km away. Maybe its not meant to make your Vinid a frigate killer? Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
A Nony Mouse Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:55:12 - [26] - Quote CCP Fozzie, you don't explicitly say, but this is a targeted module right, not an AOE (although that would be cool)?
Soldarius O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore 1459	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:55:25 - [27] - Quote Change is good. I've been a strong advocate for some sort of effectiveness changes to webs for a long time. I think this is a good first step. So when do we see falloff on all the rest? http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Alysha Saronn Wild Sentinels Honorable Third Party 6	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:56:15 - [28] - Quote Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. We are Legion

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13623	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:57:59 - [29] - Quote A Nony Mouse wrote: CCP Fozzie, you don't explicitly say, but this is a targeted module right, not an AOE (although that would be cool)? Targeted. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Ohh Yeah Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies. 278	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:59:56 - [30] - Quote Seems a little underwhelming to me if it's intention was to make small scale/solo battleship PvP more viable. The biggest problem (at least when I've done solo BS PvP) is that it's so easy to completely dismantle a BS with EWAR. Like frankly I don't care if a frigate gets under my guns, since a frigate isn't going to kill me. Most battleships can neut out and scram+web any cruiser that tries to get in range. What ends up killing you is 20+ EC-300s, damps, TDs, and getting dogpiled because you're slow as ****. While this module is neat, it doesn't really solve that problem.

5pitf1re Black Omega Security The OSS 90	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:00:57 - [31] - Quote Sakurako Kimino wrote: looking at this i like it would like if the hic could also get it That wouldn't be OP at all, right?
Albert Madullier Trillium Invariant Honorable Third Party 26	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:01:20 - [32] - Quote when the hell do capitals and battleships ever fight something at 1km? ive never in my life seen a dread or carrier brawling at 0
Gigiarc Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 10	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:01:22 - [33] - Quote Neato module.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2794	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:01:41 - [34] - Quote Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Mr Hyde113 ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 257	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:02:17 - [35] - Quote AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH YES Mr Hyde - Candidate for CSM XI Youtube Channel Twitter
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Fidelas Constans 585	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:03:25 - [36] - Quote So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power. So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40% Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Sophia Baccarin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:04:03 - [37] - Quote I like the concept but please consider not converting officer webs into these. The main reason people use officer webs at present is for the range increase, which this would severely shorten.
Alysha Saronn Wild Sentinels Honorable Third Party 6	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:04:49 - [38] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. And you should feel dumb for supporting this mod, the ** are you going to web at 1km and think you can kill it? Are you so blind by your drunken mind, that you can't see this is a huge friggin waste of time? I mean you alliance flys supers/caps no? when the are you dropping them at 1km from anything? We are Legion**
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Northern Coalition. 1897	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:06:04 - [39] - Quote whats the reasoning behind converting officer webs ? how does this stack with other webs? what are the skill requirements ?
Aliventi Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies. 913	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:06:45 - [40] - Quote Is there a way you can just add officer versions of these to the drop tables and preserve the existing officer webs? The current officer webs have uses outside of BS and capitals.

Evelgrivion Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 363	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:08:29 - [41] - Quote I love the idea of the Heavy Grappler, but my initial impression is that the optimal range sounds ever so slightly short of making it a solid module. How do you feel about three kilometers optimal?
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2794	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:08:32 - [42] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power. So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40% Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer. So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Bilbert lashlily High Flyers Northern Coalition. 4	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:08:49 - [43] - Quote +! Finally a module to slow the cancer meta down
Albert Madullier Trillium Invariant Honorable Third Party 26	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:09:22 - [44] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. a battleship should be able to solo a frigate, your dumb for thinking it shouldn't
Valarian Dumonte The Red Island Foundation Shadow Cartel 1	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:10:23 - [45] - Quote Personally I think this module is useless. Not a lot of solo battleship pvp going on these days and im not going to waste a slot on my carrier. The only ship i could see myself maybe putting this on is my Blops since you drop in at close range. Guess we'll see, i just may not be able to see the point yet.
Dog0fWaRR Carpe Noctem. Pandemic Legion 41	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:11:47 - [46] - Quote Fozzie making a good change WTF ?1!?!?!?!?
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2794	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:11:55 - [47] - Quote Alysha Saronn wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. And you should feel dumb for supporting this mod, the ** are you going to web at 1km and think you can kill it? Are you so blind by your drunken mind, that you can't see this is a huge friggin waste of time? I mean you alliance flys supers/caps no? when the ** are you dropping them at 1km from anything? Ok brain trust, leme help you here, the web works out farther than 1km, you understand that right, it works out past the range of even current webs because if it functions like our guns it will effectively web a target at opitmal + 2x falloff which means t2 webs that can begin to slow a target at nearly 20km, considerably weak at that range but still functional. On top of that, lots of things come that close to our supers, like say hictors and dictors, Armor hacs constantly close on BS because they know the BS have problems tracking their low sig at close range. Also we always drop supers on things at close range, glad you seem to have a firm grasp on eve mechanics. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 442	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:12:17 - [48] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: range is too low... fed navy web without bonuses is 60% at 14km / 18km. the meta 17 one listed here has 45% at 15.5 km... they need an extra 5km optimal before falloff The low range is the entire point. High strength, low range. Normal web: High range, low strength.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2794	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:12:40 - [49] - Quote Albert Madullier wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. a battleship should be able to solo a frigate, your dumb for thinking it shouldn't Nah, sorry, each ship should have a counter and the counter to a frigate inst a BS. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Tyr Dolorem Reikoku Pandemic Legion 169	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:12:44 - [50] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We currently plan on converting existing officer webifiers into the officer versions of these new modules.[/code]

Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2274	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:12:45 - [51] - Quote BS buff with a 200 PG requirement? This is more like a nerf since you have to massively compromise tank or offensive capabilities. I also do not see how that would help against Svipuls. They can just stay further away than 10 km with their Arties and still outrack your BS' guns. All in all, quite useless module. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Fidelas Constans 585	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:13:38 - [52] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power. So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40% Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer. So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed. at 4km (overheated) You have full 85% streanght. At +10 falloff you get 42,5% So at 10km while overheated you have around 60% (maybe little less) but once OH ends You get much farther into falloff teritory so it drops to 45%-ish Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2794	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:15:28 - [53] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power. So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40% Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer. So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed. at 4km (overheated) You have full 85% streanght. At +10 falloff you get 42,5% So at 10km while overheated you have around 60% (maybe little less - at 9 you have 63,75%)) but once OH ends You get much farther into falloff teritory so it drops to 45%-ish That is exactly what i said, thanks for putting it in shorter words Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
raknor bile Higher Than Everest The-Culture 10	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:15:47 - [54] - Quote So why is this needed? why is the current scram/web/neut/drones not effective at killing small ships and larger ships just dont kite away if scram webbed anyway.
Theon Severasse Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 136	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:16:27 - [55] - Quote How will this work in conjunction with Vindi bonuses? I assume that it will still be stronger than normal, but I assume that it isn't going to go all the way up to 100% strength
Albert Madullier Trillium Invariant Honorable Third Party 26	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:16:40 - [56] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Albert Madullier wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. a battleship should be able to solo a frigate, your dumb for thinking it shouldn't Nah, sorry, each ship should have a counter and the counter to a frigate inst a BS. you honestly believe a BS shouldn't be able to solo a frigate? wtf are you smoking
Owen Levanth Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration 442	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:16:46 - [57] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: BS buff with a 200 PG requirement? This is more like a nerf since you have to massively compromise tank or offensive capabilities. I also do not see how that would help against Svipuls. They can just stay further away than 10 km with their Arties and still outrack your BS' guns. All in all, quite useless module. I don't think so. Some battleships have problems with CPU, others with PG. So it balances out. Some ships can fit the new modules pretty damn easily (like the Scorpion or the Typhoon) others demand a little bit of sacrifice. But on the other hand, 85% webs. I'm already sharpening the knifes for the sacrifices.
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Fidelas Constans 585	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:17:10 - [58] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power. So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40% Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer. So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed. at 4km (overheated) You have full 85% streanght. At +10 falloff you get 42,5% So at 10km while overheated you have around 60% (maybe little less - at 9 you have 63,75%)) but once OH ends You get much farther into falloff teritory so it drops to 45%-ish That is exactly what i said, thanks for putting it in shorter words You started Your sentence claiming I was incorrect, so thanks for confirming I was right from the start. Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Alysha Saronn Wild Sentinels Honorable Third Party 6	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:17:23 - [59] - Quote This mod is going to be as useful as auto targeting missiles lol We are Legion
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1201	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:17:52 - [60] - Quote these look like the exact opposite of what you guys should be doing

Ohh Yeah Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies. 278	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:18:07 - [61] - Quote Theon Severasse wrote: How will this work in conjunction with Vindi bonuses? I assume that it will still be stronger than normal, but I assume that it isn't going to go all the way up to 100% strength did you actually try reading the post first or did you go straight to the comments with a question that was already answered this isn't affected by any web bonuses Vindi will still have the monster 90% 18km+ webs, rest of ships can get an 80% (and decreasing beyond 1km) web that's only 40% ish by 10km
Mr Hyde113 ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 257	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:18:27 - [62] - Quote Theon Severasse wrote: How will this work in conjunction with Vindi bonuses? I assume that it will still be stronger than normal, but I assume that it isn't going to go all the way up to 100% strength Look at the OP, these mods will not be affected by web bonuses like vindi and bhaal Mr Hyde - Candidate for CSM XI Youtube Channel Twitter
Desiderya Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 1103	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:22:46 - [63] - Quote For the tackling frigate (heavy) neuts are much more of a problem than a web that's not more dangerous than a standard webifier unless you plant yourself closer than 5-6k from your target. The fast cycle is neat and it'll definitely make tackling BSes without utility highs more interesting. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise.
Liam Inkuras AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 1634	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:24:45 - [64] - Quote Nice +1 I wear my goggles at night. Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
Gigiarc Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 10	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:26:34 - [65] - Quote Theon Severasse wrote: How will this work in conjunction with Vindi bonuses? I assume that it will still be stronger than normal, but I assume that it isn't going to go all the way up to 100% strength Have you tried reading the post first? Quote: It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or strength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links).
Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2274	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:27:35 - [66] - Quote Owen Levanth wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: BS buff with a 200 PG requirement? This is more like a nerf since you have to massively compromise tank or offensive capabilities. I also do not see how that would help against Svipuls. They can just stay further away than 10 km with their Arties and still outrack your BS' guns. All in all, quite useless module. I don't think so. Some battleships have problems with CPU, others with PG. So it balances out. Some ships can fit the new modules pretty damn easily (like the Scorpion or the Typhoon) others demand a little bit of sacrifice. But on the other hand, 85% webs. I'm already sharpening the knifes for the sacrifices. I would have problems fitting that one my preferred Armageddon unless I compromise point or neut range, or even tank due to CPU issues. Furthermore, when something is at 0 on me (like Deimoses), they usually tend to not orbit me to make their weapons track better on my BS regardless; and further away, I need the 10 km 60% webs and not reduced web strength that allows my targets to escape easier or make my drones hit other drones less reliably. Still useless. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Anthar Thebess 1422	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:29:58 - [67] - Quote Nice. Can we get this as a pirate store ONLY module for faction versions? This stores did not see any real change for years. I bet no one in CCP remember when. Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists Show your support to The Cause!
Moac Tor Cyber Core Stain Confederation 419	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:30:12 - [68] - Quote Great. I've been saying BS's and BC's need some more hull specific modules for some time now, and so I'm pleasantly surprised to see this come out of the blue. Another module I'd like to see would be a BS specific AOE scram. Also BCs could do with something like this also, so I hope that you have something in the pipeline for them too. Modulated ECM Effects An Alternative to Skill Trading
Zhilia Mann Tide Way Out Productions 2463	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:30:39 - [69] - Quote I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance 235	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:32:19 - [70] - Quote Zhilia Mann wrote: I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept. can you do the same for faction web and grapple, and top meta web and grapple please?

Justin Cody Hard Knocks Inc. Hard Knocks Citizens 344	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:33:24 - [71] - Quote but when do we get a 60km smartbomb that instas all light tackle?
Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2661	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:33:27 - [72] - Quote Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Loki Feiht Feiht Family Clan 208	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:35:32 - [73] - Quote Is this already picked apart for tiercide or are you introducing a module that will in the future be put through the tiercide process? Also, I see optimal's and falloffs, will these be introduced to the webs already available? More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content-áthread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858
Lyra Gerie Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 81	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:36:46 - [74] - Quote Alundil wrote: I think this is a cool module full of fun potential shenanigans. My only worry at the moment (due to pure paper conjecture) is that this will really neuter medium and small blaster ships whose optimals are well within the 4km OH range of these modules. Currently, getting under the guns on a battleship/capital is the key to survival for blaster ships. This module seems to affect them to the largest degree in terms of optimal ranges and usage. Time will tell if this is a real issue or not. From looking at it void might be right out but null will still give these blaster ships a place to fight so long as they stick around outside the 4k optimal of overheat. That isn't to say however that a grappler + regular web wouldn't be enough to screw over small ship blaster pilots. Then again, blaster ships are good in many other areas so losing this might not hurt so much.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance 236	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:38:47 - [75] - Quote Zhilia Mann wrote: I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept. could you also do it with the 34.5% interdiction fleet bonus? as that only applies to normal webs
Eternus8lux8lucis Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 627	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:39:15 - [76] - Quote This is gonna give a lot of new options for BS pilots. I like it will think on it some more. Imam: Have you heard anything I've said? Richard B. Riddick: You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right? Imam: That's right. Richard B. Riddick: Had to end sometime.
Moac Tor Cyber Core Stain Confederation 419	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:39:39 - [77] - Quote Zappity wrote: Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Pretty sure it would stack with normal webs, although if not then personally I wouldn't complain. Modulated ECM Effects An Alternative to Skill Trading
Masao Kurata Perkone Caldari State 319	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:41:27 - [78] - Quote So without heat it's equal to a normal web at 4km, with heat at 7km, super web below, normal web above. Interesting. Not coming up with anything that seems obviously amazing to do with these so they're probably somewhat niche, which is good because we have enough ewar for general use anyway now that guidance disruptors are in. Could be interesting in specific scenarios, good addition I think.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 327	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:41:50 - [79] - Quote Zappity wrote: Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Why wouldn't it stack? No different then having 2 webs on a huginn
Zhilia Mann Tide Way Out Productions 2464	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:42:09 - [80] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: Zhilia Mann wrote: I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept. can you do the same for faction web and grapple, and top meta web and grapple please? Faction up on third tab. Top meta will go on fourth in a sec.

Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 296	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:44:26 - [81] - Quote dusts off trusty old blasterthron War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Theon Severasse Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 136	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:45:10 - [82] - Quote Gigiarc wrote: Theon Severasse wrote: How will this work in conjunction with Vindi bonuses? I assume that it will still be stronger than normal, but I assume that it isn't going to go all the way up to 100% strength Have you tried reading the post first? Quote: It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or strength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). Did you try reading the other two comments saying the exact same thing? No, because reading is hard, and it's easier for someone else to point out obvious **** to you.
Moac Tor Cyber Core Stain Confederation 419	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:46:38 - [83] - Quote Zhilia Mann wrote: I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept. Thank you for sharing that graph, shows clearly how these stack up vs normal webs. I do think these could do with a bit of extra falloff, they become incredibly weak at longer ranges with standard webs outperforming them at around 10km to 12km. I'd suggest that CCP buffs the falloff on them by about 25% at least. Modulated ECM Effects An Alternative to Skill Trading
Bilbert lashlily High Flyers Northern Coalition. 6	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:54:44 - [84] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Albert Madullier wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. a battleship should be able to solo a frigate, your dumb for thinking it shouldn't Nah, sorry, each ship should have a counter and the counter to a frigate inst a BS. No arguments here. I just would like to be able to counter it, albeit worse at it then a frig desi or cruiser, but id like to be able to fit it up to counter it.
Esnaelc Sin'led The Unchained Club 50	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:55:40 - [85] - Quote Concidering normal Optimal and Fall-Off rules with a T2 Graper : T2 Graper = -85% speed // 1km Optimal // 10km FallOff Optimal = 100% FallOff = 50% Optimal<->FallOff x2 = 10% @01km (optimal) = -85% speed @10km (falloff) = -42.5% speed @~20km = -8.5% speed (am i right ?) PLUS can only fit ONE SINGLE graper. Now Vindicator (Minmatar BS @5) with T2 web : Range : 10km Role bonnus : 10% per Matar BS skill level From 0km to 10km : -90% speed CAN STACK. Conclusion : Nope. Vindis aren't dead. AT ALL. __________________________________________________ That being said, again, i would've thought CCP to be more creative and not just copying an existing eWar to push up BSs a bit. Sad about that 'lost' creativity, but happy to see what could come out with that new module.
Zhilia Mann Tide Way Out Productions 2465	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:56:13 - [86] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: Zhilia Mann wrote: I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept. could you also do it with the 34.5% interdiction fleet bonus? as that only applies to normal webs Linked version up. Not sure whether to include the bonus on optimal for the new module. Right now assuming not.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance 237	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:57:41 - [87] - Quote yeh. the graphs show that T2 vs T2 is spot on, but as soon as you add links, or up the meta, the grapples become worse than their web counterparts. up the optimal 2, 3 or 4km, knock that oh bonus down a little. and add 20/25% falloff. this will make them useful instead of just niech
Lucas Quaan Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 115	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:58:20 - [88] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We currently plan on converting existing officer webifiers into the officer versions of these new modules. I might be a niche application, but certain Bhaal/Vindi pilots would probably prefer if you didn't do this.
Ron Mexxico Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:59:52 - [89] - Quote Alysha Saronn wrote: I mean you alliance flys supers/caps no? when the **** are you dropping them at 1km from anything? ALL DA TIME
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2907	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:59:58 - [90] - Quote Does this mean my anom ratting dread is a thing?

Zhilia Mann Tide Way Out Productions 2465	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:02:36 - [91] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: yeh. the graphs show that T2 vs T2 is spot on, but as soon as you add links, or up the meta, the grapples become worse than their web counterparts. up the optimal 2, 3 or 4km, knock that oh bonus down a little. and add 20/25% falloff. this will make them useful instead of just niech I'm going to have to agree on the problem. I haven't run the numbers on a solution, but the FN web still absolutely wins out. Links are interesting; they obviously help normal webs more but I'd like to know for sure whether they add to optimal of grapples as that does tweak things a bit. Officer... isn't even close.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2796	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:03:13 - [92] - Quote Albert Madullier wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Albert Madullier wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. a battleship should be able to solo a frigate, your dumb for thinking it shouldn't Nah, sorry, each ship should have a counter and the counter to a frigate inst a BS. you honestly believe a BS shouldn't be able to solo a frigate? wtf are you smoking I'm not the only one who feels that way, evidently the game designers thing its bad too. Have fun with that one. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Alexxei GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 28	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:06:28 - [93] - Quote Anything to combat the frigate menace is A OK in my book. While you're at it, take another look at removing the nullification from interceptors. Nullification, while still maintaning any combat ability at all is dumb and bad and leads to coward gameplay and tactics. This game should encourage people to fight not run away.
Worthy Angel R-Isk Positive 0	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:10:57 - [94] - Quote Zhilia Mann wrote: Ncc 1709 wrote: yeh. the graphs show that T2 vs T2 is spot on, but as soon as you add links, or up the meta, the grapples become worse than their web counterparts. up the optimal 2, 3 or 4km, knock that oh bonus down a little. and add 20/25% falloff. this will make them useful instead of just niech I'm going to have to agree on the problem. I haven't run the numbers on a solution, but the FN web still absolutely wins out. Links are interesting; they obviously help normal webs more but I'd like to know for sure whether they add to optimal of grapples as that does tweak things a bit. Officer... isn't even close. In a MJD battleship, I only care about hitting things within scram range. Based on the graphs, these webs are comparable or better in that range, unless I'm going up against interceptors or links.
Ohh Yeah Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies. 280	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:13:14 - [95] - Quote Would rather have seen a module (BS-size only) that produces a shield reducing all damage in (or out) by 75% and reducing EWAR effectiveness by as much. If you want to fight the solo battleship, you go inside the sphere or you don't break his tank (and he doesn't do much damage to you either) The reason solo BS blows is because you get kited and EWAR'd to **** and can't land tackle on cruisers plinking away at 20km+, not because you can't deal with frigates orbiting at 500m..
Helene Fidard CTRL-Q 33	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:13:21 - [96] - Quote cool, another stealth buff to kiting neato mod though
Masao Kurata Perkone Caldari State 319	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:15:45 - [97] - Quote Thinking about it, converting officer mods is a really bad idea and while I don't normally care about officer mods, don't do it. In fact this mod is so niche it doesn't need officer or even faction variants, just introduce T1, meta, T2. Officer webs are really useful, officer grapplers are paperweights.
Cameron Bohannon Exit-Strategy Exit Strategy.. 0	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:16:06 - [98] - Quote I really like the idea of these new modules. I just think the falloff range is a little too short. instead of 10 km i think something like 15 km on the t2 version would be more fitting. This is because a battleship with large blasters and void will get over 10 km falloff. You will not even be able to web something that would be within your damage application range. example: T2 large neutron blasters with void = 6.8 km optimal, 13.1 km falloff, T2 large 800 mm auto cannons with hail = 3 km optimal, 21 km falloff T2 Mega Pulse Lasers with Conflagration = 16 km optimal, 29 km falloff T2 Torpedo Launchers with Rage = 16.9 km range These are all pulled from EFT on unbonused ships. Even when using the smallest large weapon systems, almost all of them get over 15 km falloff or optimal. The only one that does not get over 10 km falloff is an T2 Electron blaster with void (it gets 8.3 km falloff). Lets be honest. You are not going to be able to web anything in a battleship when most of the meta today is all kite fits such as arty svipuls. Which means even tho they are within your gun range when using the shortest range ammo, you can still not track them. Switch to long range weapon systems and it is even worse. If you move the falloff of these webs to around 15 km, you would then be able to web arty svipuls using phased plasma, but even then, the webs will more than likely not effect the speed enough to even matter. So why use these instead of normal webs when i would need to be around 4 km(is a guess) away from anything to get the normal application of what a normal web would be.
Arya Regnar Darwins Right Hand 893	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:23:49 - [99] - Quote Can marauders fit them? This is a pretty important question. I'm not sure if BS includes marauders and blops in that bracket. EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Nou Mene Out of Focus Odin's Call 16	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:24:03 - [100] - Quote k, i didnt liked the idea at first... after watching graphs (yours and mine) i feel that they are a good addition for BS. (actually RIP current web unless you in a bhaal or vindi; waiting for disclosure on future link mechanics) My only concern is how higher meta grapplers dont get a proportional bonus at overheating. You get more, relatively speaking, in a meta 1 grappler vs a meta 17. best regards, keep the good work

Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 306	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:25:03 - [101] - Quote Like the idea of the module, not sure how it will work out in terms of balance right now though. The numbers look good when compared without links, and even with they'll be really good on some ships. Looking forward to playing with them on Sisi.
Ashterothi Aideron Robotics 347	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:28:05 - [102] - Quote Am I to understand by your chart that webs are not also getting a falloff? Sorry if this has already been addressed. Listen to Hydrostatic Podcast for all your Empyrean needs!
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1201	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:28:05 - [103] - Quote Gabriel Karade wrote: dusts off trusty old blasterthron hyperion is better in every way except sig radius
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 14022	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:29:37 - [104] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, sorry if i missed this but will this be achieved via hard coding or prohibitive fitting because i can see these being squeezed onto t3 cruisers if its the latter (and i doubt any of us want to see that. Better the Devil you know. =]\|[=
Cyrek Ohaya Blazing Sun Group 21	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:38:11 - [105] - Quote Diminishing returns alongside webs?
RiotRick Alpha Republic - Transcenders of Space and Time Solyaris Chtonium 13	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:41:07 - [106] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Friends, pilots, capsuleers, lend me your ears! Today we're ready to discuss a new module that we are planning on releasing in our March patch. I'm excited to see how you creative pilots take advantage of them, esp solo/small gang BS pilots who should get a lot of value from them. The Stasis Grappler module is a new class of web that has high strength, low optimal and high falloff. It will be the first webifier-type module to use falloff, which will reduce the strength of the web as the range increases. This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, and just one per ship. It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or strength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). As someone that flies webbing ships (check who loses more Rapiers than anyone) -- I approve of this addition. I do want more range though, considering the cowardly alpha kitey (CAK) fleets are shooting at ya 80km away. I always felt a battleship should be able to "reach out" and touch someone to effectively counter people being CAKs.
Mr Floydy Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 306	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:41:49 - [107] - Quote Ralph King-Griffin wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, sorry if i missed this but will this be achieved via hard coding or prohibitive fitting because i can see these being squeezed onto t3 cruisers if its the latter (and i doubt any of us want to see that. Yeh it'll be class locked like the MJD, would be hilariously OP on a Proteus or Astarte :D
Denidil Cascade Crest 646	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:42:33 - [108] - Quote Good module fozzie. But I would say that instead of changing existing officer webs into these just made officer versions of these drop. keep both officer webs and officer stasis grapplers available. Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
Grath Telkin Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 2799	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:47:27 - [109] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: dusts off trusty old blasterthron hyperion is better in every way except sig radius Hypes tracking sucks Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Cartheron Crust Matari Exodus 188	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:48:29 - [110] - Quote Nice Battleship buff. I approve of this product and/or service.

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1201	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:51:19 - [111] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: dusts off trusty old blasterthron hyperion is better in every way except sig radius Hypes tracking sucks I'd take an extra web and a heavy neut over multiple tracking bonuses tbh
ArmyOfMe BANISHED. The WeHurt Initiative 580	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:53:25 - [112] - Quote There is a ******* god =D QUOTE CCP Dolan and the EVE Online development team:-áThe battle was relatively even for some time with CFC and Russian forces holding moderate lead at first and only have a slight lead in Titan kills. Then came a turning point in the battle. Manfred Sideous, the initial Fleet Commander for PL/N3, handed over command to the CEO of Northern Coalition., Vince Draken
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 441	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:55:30 - [113] - Quote I really really cannot understate how bad the decision is to convert officer webs into grapplers. As someone who for the past 3-4 years used a supercarrier with officer web (and on-grid interdiction links mind you) and as somoene who in the past has used officer webs on Bhaalgorns, the only reason people use officer webs is for the awesome range you get with overheat/ship bonuses/interdiction links. The 29km overheated 60% web on my super is worth the money I spent on it. Having a web that is overpowering within 10km of my supercap is useless because nothing web-able ever stays that close to me by the time I lock it. I can't really comment on how good/bad the grappler will be for microgang Battleship PvP, but I can say for certainty that please leave the officer webs alone otherwise you render them completely useless.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2957	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:55:36 - [114] - Quote Fozzie, I have a concern regarding the power vs fitting ratio of these. If you are going to make them take significantly more fitting than a normal web, then it should be better than a normal web at a normal webs range. Additionally since you aren't having links affect these, as soon as you have links a normal web is vastly superior. In short, either give them fitting comparable to a normal web since they are a 6 of 1 half a dozen of the other trade off currently, or give them more power to reflect their additional fitting requirements. And make links affect them, or remove links from normal webs. Otherwise you are creating a very niche module that is actually inferior in most cases to a normal web.
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 903	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:55:38 - [115] - Quote Why bother introducing new modules instead of just changing existing webs to look like this? Oh right, because web strength hull bonuses are broken... :p Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 173	Posted - 2016.02.07 22:56:35 - [116] - Quote Ralph King-Griffin wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, sorry if i missed this but will this be achieved via hard coding or prohibitive fitting because i can see these being squeezed onto t3 cruisers if its the latter (and i doubt any of us want to see that. Good chance it will use same rule as Large MJD, aka only BS, Navy BS, Pirate BS, Blop and Marauder can use it
Theronth Valarax V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 90	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:04:43 - [117] - Quote @CCP Fozzie Is adding falloff for regular Stasis Webifiers and Warp Scramblers planned for future releases? Check out my Youtube channel

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13632	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:09:25 - [118] - Quote Theronth Valarax wrote: @CCP Fozzie Is adding falloff for regular Stasis Webifiers and Warp Scramblers planned for future releases? We'll keep the option available, but we don't have any current plans to do so. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

ArmyOfMe BANISHED. The WeHurt Initiative 580	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:10:54 - [119] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: dusts off trusty old blasterthron hyperion is better in every way except sig radius Some of us are just nostalgic QUOTE CCP Dolan and the EVE Online development team:-áThe battle was relatively even for some time with CFC and Russian forces holding moderate lead at first and only have a slight lead in Titan kills. Then came a turning point in the battle. Manfred Sideous, the initial Fleet Commander for PL/N3, handed over command to the CEO of Northern Coalition., Vince Draken
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 173	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:10:55 - [120] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Theronth Valarax wrote: @CCP Fozzie Is adding falloff for regular Stasis Webifiers and Warp Scramblers planned for future releases? We'll keep the option available, but we don't have any current plans to do so. is there reason why Link will not affect Grappler?

Arla Sarain 748	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:14:19 - [121] - Quote Stealth buff to Missile BSs. Turret BS can go repackage+reprocess.
Mad Abbat Talon Swarm 30	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:15:19 - [122] - Quote so you buff blasters and autos <<< 4km range. what about lazers and torps that hit at 16km with closest range ammo? Don't you think that will not help poor lasers to track, and poor amarr ship need a bit of help to apply that scorch damage at optimal of 50km?
Niriel Greez Pwn 'N Play SpaceMonkey's Alliance 47	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:25:10 - [123] - Quote This is a great module. But for the love of god, don't convert existing officer webs into officer HSG's. You're effectively making multi-billion ISK Vindicator fits worthless, while the equivalent officer HSG's are worse stat-wise than the same level of officer web. Just make officer versions of both, so you have officer webs and officer HSG's
Whisperen Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels 47	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:25:45 - [124] - Quote Looks useless by itself might be ok when combined with a faction web on a maunder or dread.
Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2661	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:33:46 - [125] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Zappity wrote: Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Why wouldn't it stack? No different then having 2 webs on a huginn Because Fozzie wrote, "It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses...and no benefit from gang links." That sounds like it is in a new meta group so it is very possible it won't stack. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Kibitt Kallinikov Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 16	Posted - 2016.02.07 23:41:35 - [126] - Quote Awesome, this combines two things I've been in favor of: 1. Falloff on webs. 2. New toys for Battleships.
Kenneth Feld Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 327	Posted - 2016.02.08 00:14:53 - [127] - Quote Zappity wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Zappity wrote: Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Why wouldn't it stack? No different then having 2 webs on a huginn Because Fozzie wrote, "It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses...and no benefit from gang links." That sounds like it is in a new meta group so it is very possible it won't stack. You need to read twitter, Fozzie said it stacks about an hour ago https://twitter.com/GrathTelkin/status/696460014685257728
Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2661	Posted - 2016.02.08 00:36:51 - [128] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: Zappity wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Zappity wrote: Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Why wouldn't it stack? No different then having 2 webs on a huginn Because Fozzie wrote, "It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses...and no benefit from gang links." That sounds like it is in a new meta group so it is very possible it won't stack. You need to read twitter, Fozzie said it stacks about an hour ago https://twitter.com/GrathTelkin/status/696460014685257728 Thanks. I think that's the right way to go. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Missy Lorelai Sickology Together We Solo 1	Posted - 2016.02.08 00:42:10 - [129] - Quote While CCP is working on this they should also think about a "combat oriented tractor beam" for capital hulls; think harpoon tactics. would bring new meaning to the term "whaling"... Could be interesting. M-
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 55	Posted - 2016.02.08 01:45:16 - [130] - Quote My Mega, it's Mega! We roamed the whole night through, My Mega, My Mega is coming for you! Love this module! Can't wait to make my Mega more beastly!

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1256	Posted - 2016.02.08 02:18:39 - [131] - Quote surely 90% vindis are just better? .. so you must be planning on nerfing them down to 75%? ... or maybe nerf normal webs a little instead maybe 50% strength cap on T2's and reduce the 10km/15km faction webs optimals a little maybe a little falloff for optimal. also 300% why keep adding crazy high percentage's to ships and mods? .. if you need too have such high bonuses then maybe you're doing something wrong... T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 55	Posted - 2016.02.08 02:35:20 - [132] - Quote Harvey James wrote: surely 90% vindis are just better? .. so you must be planning on nerfing them down to 75%? ... or maybe nerf normal webs a little instead maybe 50% strength cap on T2's and reduce the 10km/15km faction webs optimals a little maybe a little falloff for optimal. also 300% why keep adding crazy high percentage's to ships and mods? .. if you need too have such high bonuses then maybe you're doing something wrong... Nah, Vindi will be special cause it can do normal Webs with 90%, at normal Range, this is more of an answer for Battleships needing something good to hold things in place, I am thinking the Cap consumtion on this will be high-ish as well, but we will see, and one more thing, 300% onto 1km, is not much..
Iam Widdershins Puppies and Christmas 899	Posted - 2016.02.08 02:38:22 - [133] - Quote Sounds cool. One major question: Does the debuff from Heavy Stasis Grapplers fall into the same stacking category as regular stasis webs, or do they stack separately? Like say you are webbed once with a T2 stasis web (-60%)and once with a T2 grappler (-85%). Would they stack together, reducing the stasis web's effectiveness to first-stacking-penalty levels of -52% (for a total of -92.8%) or would they both apply at full strength (for a total of -94%)? Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Zhilia Mann Tide Way Out Productions 2465	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:01:07 - [134] - Quote Iam Widdershins wrote: Sounds cool. One major question: Does the debuff from Heavy Stasis Grapplers fall into the same stacking category as regular stasis webs, or do they stack separately? Like say you are webbed once with a T2 stasis web (-60%)and once with a T2 grappler (-85%). Would they stack together, reducing the stasis web's effectiveness to first-stacking-penalty levels of -52% (for a total of -92.8%) or would they both apply at full strength (for a total of -94%)? Same stack. ConfIrmed on twItter.
Anhenka Infinite Point Northern Army 1518	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:27:52 - [135] - Quote Yet one more voice for leaving the current officer webs alone from me. Current webs are useful on capitals because of their much longer range, while a grappler designed to be used from as close of range as possible would be nearly useless.
Kaldfir Gongukaslan Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance 5	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:50:05 - [136] - Quote Sounds like an interesting module, but [This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps] really bothers me. I hope this means that the fitting cost will make this impractical for smaller ships, and not that there's going to be a strict restriction on which ship classes can fit the module, but looking at the stats that doesn't seem to be the case. One of the great things in EVE is coming up with interesting or unexpected ways to fit a ship, and these types of restrictions preclude that. Bumping up the PG to 500+ would be enough I think to make fitting one of these to a cruiser require gimping the fit. If that's not enough, a velocity penalty while the module is active might be a good deterrent to cruisers/battlecruisers fitting these. Please please just make it bad to fit outside its intended use case, and not impossible.
BuckStrider Hmmzor. Muffins of Mayhem 530	Posted - 2016.02.08 03:52:14 - [137] - Quote Yet another buff for the carebear mission runners in HS. It's a complete lie if you think this mod is being introduced to combat 'the frigate menace' out in 0.0 And really? Capital ships? I thought capital ships were getting a big buff pretty soon when it comes to warp core strength so that a frigate or 3 wouldn't be able to tackle it. Mine smart. Mine safe. Purchase your mining permit today...... www.minerbumping.com
Zappity Black Aces I N F A M O U S 2661	Posted - 2016.02.08 04:11:45 - [138] - Quote BuckStrider wrote: Yet another buff for the carebear mission runners in HS. It's a complete lie if you think this mod is being introduced to combat 'the frigate menace' out in 0.0 And really? Capital ships? I thought capital ships were getting a big buff pretty soon when it comes to warp core strength so that a frigate or 3 wouldn't be able to tackle it. Not convinced by this. If a mission runner fits one specifically for PvP defence it means they know what they're doing. Which means it would be pretty hard to kill them regardless. Or are you talking about PvE use? Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 55	Posted - 2016.02.08 04:22:38 - [139] - Quote BuckStrider wrote: Yet another buff for the carebear mission runners in HS. It's a complete lie if you think this mod is being introduced to combat 'the frigate menace' out in 0.0 And really? Capital ships? I thought capital ships were getting a big buff pretty soon when it comes to warp core strength so that a frigate or 3 wouldn't be able to tackle it. Huh? I am strapping one of these things to my roaming Mega to kill any who try to get under my Guns, and Mission Runners? Really? This is a combat module through and through, why in hell would a Mission Runner use this over a normal Web? 10-13km Range unheated for.. 1km.. Yeah.. Your smart.. slow clap your a smart cookie, nothing gets past you does it, and they will be good on a Dread, think about when one of those annoying Hictors get under it's Guns, or gets to close? Oh look, it's dead now, did you see the pilots face? It's gone now, but did you see it?
Zack Jew The Scope Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 04:25:44 - [140] - Quote I personally don't think the fitting space for these justifies the slot compared to a normal web. If fully solo i suppose split 1 Grapple/1 Regular web would be a good set up if it doesn't have to compromise the rest of the fit. Would it be out of the question to extend these to battlecruisers in some fashion like the MJDs were? If only to drill them further into the whole middle ground of ships between cruisers and battleships they are supposed to be?

William Rokov Better go yolo Yolo Brothers 109	Posted - 2016.02.08 04:46:21 - [141] - Quote How long it can be overheated? No links, no scouts. True solo pvp pilot.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 729	Posted - 2016.02.08 04:49:25 - [142] - Quote Haven't seen it asked yet but if this module doesn't get bonuses from links or roles applied to it then does it also circumvent the penalties applied to webs in black holes? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Sabriz Adoudel Move along there is nothing here 5673	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:50:18 - [143] - Quote Well that is an interesting shakeup. I like it a lot even though I fear I'll be on the wrong end of it more often than not. A clarification: Can all battleships use it, including T2 ones? It will be very strong on Marauders (although I expect still fair). I think these should be able to be fitted to heavy interdictors as well (and those hulls should receive a considerable fitting discount on them, at least for PG). And finally, there looks to be room for some deadspace ones too - perhaps with the following stats: Deadspace Stasis Grappler - Range Optimized 4 cap 2000ms 25 CPU 230 PG 300% overheat -86.5% speed 2000m optimal 12500m falloff - (unsure which faction to suggest) Deadspace Stasis Grappler - Strength Optimized 4 cap 2000ms 25 CPU 280 PG 300% overheat -87.5% speed 1000m optimal 9000m falloff - Centii Deadspace Stasis Grappler - Fitting Optimized 4 cap 2000ms 10 CPU 100 PG 300% overheat -87% speed 1000m optimal 11000m falloff - Coreli 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".
Sabriz Adoudel Move along there is nothing here 5673	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:51:17 - [144] - Quote William Rokov wrote: How long it can be overheated? This is a really important point. If it burns out fast like a MWD, the 3km boost is much less significant than if it burns out as slowly as an armor hardener. 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".
Mystical Might V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 219	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:53:35 - [145] - Quote Hi Fozzie, I'm just a lowly officer-module using member of the community, so I was wondering whether you'd be able to give people the option, like you are with Triage Carriers -> FAX, to convert their modules into what they want? A blanket change of officer webs into this... whatever it is, would remove plenty of play styles while not really adding much in the way of diversity... or fun. It would be way more effective to add these grapplers to the loot tables, while also providing the above option. Think of the Vindis, the Bhaals, the Machs, the stupid recons, the supers... Thanks Random Scrub #1512612728318194 PS: Neuts were bad enough. Please not this.
Sabriz Adoudel Move along there is nothing here 5673	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:54:31 - [146] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Carbon Alabel wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the name, but it looks pretty solid otherwise, except for one thing: how efficient will it be at falloff range? If the strength falls close to zero at falloff range, I don't really see this as a viable alternative to regular webs. At optimal+1x falloff, they are half of full strength. You should probably elaborate more on this in the original post. At optimal, 100% strength Opt + 0.5 falloffs: ~84% strength Opt + 1.0 falloffs: 50% strength Opt + 1.5f: ~20% strength Opt + 2f: 6.25% strength 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".
Zarvox Toral Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill Apocalypse Now. 13	Posted - 2016.02.08 06:09:59 - [147] - Quote It's going to be interesting to see how this affects the phenomena of the plane of orbit rotating randomly when velocity is adjusted. For anybody that doesn't know what I'm talking about - say you have ordered your ship to close on a target from 20km by ordering it to orbit at 500m. For arguments sake let's say this happens to put you into a horizontal orbital plane around the target. If you then decide to change your velocity manually to 3/4 full, or, you get webbed, the plane of your orbit will rotate randomly, sometimes dramatically, causing your ship to slow RIGHT DOWN as it adjusts to orbiting in a plane other than horizontal. Let's say you again change your velocity to 1/2 speed, or get a second web placed onto you. Once again your ship can dramatically slow down as it decides to orbit in a whole new plane. Now let's say I'm in a battleship with one of these grapple webs, and some dude comes in from 20km to tackle, and he's done so by selecting orbit @ 500 on me. If I web him as soon as I can, and his max velocity is constantly being adjusted as he gets closer and closer, wouldn't this cause absolute mayhem to his orbital plane and probably cause him to get blapped much faster than he should do as his orbital plane is constantly being rotated around? This seems.... like it could be a big problem. What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach.
Borat Guereen Chao3 Chao3 Alliance 47	Posted - 2016.02.08 07:03:29 - [148] - Quote +1 for the concept, especialy making it a BS/Cap module only. I also like the 300% optimal on overheating, that will require piloting skills from the player or risk seeing the module burned out early. CCP Fozzie wrote: We currently plan on converting existing officer webifiers into the officer versions of these new modules. Could you provide some insights into the reasons why you consider this "conversion"? Do you have reasons to believe that the current stasis officer modules are overpowered? Candidate for CSM XI Speaker of Chao3
Formosus Funus The Executives Executive Outcomes 16	Posted - 2016.02.08 07:24:25 - [149] - Quote Cool new mod, but this really should be a AOE module. Or is that a role for perhaps a Command Destroyer kind of shiptype? But I do believe it should be AOE. Once it was actually an art in PVP to get under the guns, even while being webbed at 90%. However, over time smaller ships got their speed increased, and it has become an art to actually hit something which is in low orbit.
Awkward Pi Duolus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 160	Posted - 2016.02.08 07:40:16 - [150] - Quote Another stillborn mod. Made worse by all these limitations.. (hull, bonus, links etc.)

Anomilk Dairlylover Lazerhawks 14	Posted - 2016.02.08 07:42:32 - [151] - Quote Will grapplers be affected by black hole wormhole effects? i.e. web strength penalty
Lavayar Russian SOBR Dream Fleet 240	Posted - 2016.02.08 08:10:04 - [152] - Quote Looks cool. But CCP should definitely think about AOE effect. That should bring interesting new player experience.
Jackaryas Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 123	Posted - 2016.02.08 08:11:19 - [153] - Quote Nvm i cant read Suddenly Spaceships Youtube Suddenly Spaceships Recruitment Thread
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 730	Posted - 2016.02.08 08:22:30 - [154] - Quote Formosus Funus wrote: Cool new mod, but this really should be a AOE module. Or is that a role for perhaps a Command Destroyer kind of shiptype? But I do believe it should be AOE. Once it was actually an art in PVP to get under the guns, even while being webbed at 90%. However, over time smaller ships got their speed increased, and it has become an art to actually hit something which is in low orbit. And achieve what? Creating squads of instawarping cruisers or whatever? Emergency warpouts for whole fleets if ** goes ** up? If this module was aoe I think every gank fleet in existence would want one. Every fleet of any imaginable composition would want them in pairs to immediately slingshot their whole fleet since it has 2second cycle it wears offf straight away too. Imagibe slippery petes with these. Or svipul gangs or literally any fleet ever. In brief you idea is terrible. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Skyler Hawk The Tuskers The Tuskers Co. 67	Posted - 2016.02.08 08:41:41 - [155] - Quote Zarvox Toral wrote: It's going to be interesting to see how this affects the phenomena of the plane of orbit rotating randomly when velocity is adjusted. ... What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach, and the orbital plane this ship is trying to get into is being flipped around randomly with every refresh of the web strength. Don't really see a huge problem here tbh - you can circumvent the issue entirely by orbiting manually, so it just makes the module more powerful against bad/lazy pilots while giving more skilled players an opportunity for counterplay.
Phase Three Deathwish Squad Violence of Action. 1	Posted - 2016.02.08 08:57:13 - [156] - Quote Very nice! really happy with this news
Solarus Explorer The Scope Gallente Federation 11	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:00:38 - [157] - Quote +1 to the idea. I do think the webs could use more falloff though, to give the solo/small gang BS pilot some opportunity to catch a cruiser/frig kiting at 20km (note i said 'some' chance, not guarantee). I doubt a falloff of 14-15km would be too much for this module. It would also give solo BSs some incentive to fit a MWD instead of always using a MJD, since now with a MWD and grappler they could try to catch stuff that comes too close while orbiting in long point range.
Mystical Might V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 220	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:08:16 - [158] - Quote Solarus Explorer wrote: +1 to the idea. I do think the webs could use more falloff though, to give the solo/small gang BS pilot some opportunity to catch a cruiser/frig kiting at 20km (note i said 'some' chance, not guarantee). I doubt a falloff of 14-15km would be too much for this module. It would also give solo BSs some incentive to fit a MWD instead of always using a MJD, since now with a MWD and grappler they could try to catch stuff that comes too close while orbiting in long point range. The graph suggests that 22 will web out to 20+km as is. Faction and officer will go further; obviously it won't be as strong effect-wise, but it'll reach.
Cristl 316	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:11:50 - [159] - Quote Zarvox Toral wrote: What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach, and the orbital plane this ship is trying to get into is being flipped around randomly with every refresh of the web strength. This is an interesting point. To be honest, could we not have a more sophisticated orbit command? I don't want the game playing itself for me, nor do I want to kill the hamsters with Bessel functions, but it must be possible to program a more intelligent algorithm that prioritises maintaining velocity more highly.
Zarvox Toral Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill Apocalypse Now. 17	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:23:55 - [160] - Quote Cristl wrote: Zarvox Toral wrote: What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach, and the orbital plane this ship is trying to get into is being flipped around randomly with every refresh of the web strength. This is an interesting point. To be honest, could we not have a more sophisticated orbit command? I don't want the game playing itself for me, nor do I want to kill the hamsters with Bessel functions, but it must be possible to program a more intelligent algorithm that prioritises maintaining velocity more highly. A new orbit command, perhaps with the ability to manually set or adjust the orbital plane would be great, but somehow I don't think that's gonna be happening anytime soon. One can only hope. I've thought about this a lot over the past few hours and I really think it's gonna be absolute chaos. Since even infinitesimal adjustments to max velocity can cause massive rotations of the orbital plane (try orbiting something at 500m, then very slightly dropping your velocity, you'll see what I mean, your ship goes mental trying to attain the new orbit) and therefore will very often cause the target ship to come to an almost complete stop before attempting to settle into a different orbital plane, and since many pilots will use the orbit command to get close enough to scram, as soon as a tackler is webbed, even at opt+2*falloff (~20km or more), their ship will very often just flat out stop moving while still 20km from the target, slowly pick up velocity only to be stopped/severely slowed, every two seconds. Unless CCP will be changing the way velocity adjustments cause havoc to your orbit, this is going to be a nightmare for tacklers. Tacklers are going to be blapped ridiculously easily from 20km even though the web effect is tiny, because their ship will be potentially coming to a stop every 2 seconds when the web effect is refreshed, or recalculated, or whatever. I should point out that it's actually great for me, I don't fly tackle in fleets, and when I fly solo BS I know that I can exploit the crap out of this to blap frigs from 20km even with just a t2 grappler, but it does seem super, super broken to me. I feel like I must be missing something though, because it just doesn't make sense that nobody has thought of this. Plenty of people know about disengaging/re-engaging webs in order to provoke the change of orbital plane, reduce transversal briefly and score huge hits, so either a) I'm missing something massive, or b) these webs will be unbelievably overpowered.

tasman devil HUN Corp. HUN Reloaded 71	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:23:55 - [161] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Friends, pilots, capsuleers, lend me your ears! Today we're ready to discuss a new module that we are planning on releasing in our March patch. I'm excited to see how you creative pilots take advantage of them, esp solo/small gang BS pilots who should get a lot of value from them. The Stasis Grappler module is a new class of web that has high strength, low optimal and high falloff. It will be the first webifier-type module to use falloff, which will reduce the strength of the web as the range increases. This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, and just one per ship. It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or strength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). THIS. Seriously. Fozzy. Please... there are like 500 modules that BADLY needs a tiercide rebalance (and in the right direction) and instead you are introducion MORE modules? ehhh I don't belive in reincarnation I've never believed in it in my previous lives either...
Capqu Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 1191	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:44:36 - [162] - Quote holy **** i almost bought the tobi web in jita yesterday thank god i decided to sleep on it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Blackfeathers Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 34	Posted - 2016.02.08 09:58:20 - [163] - Quote I think the REAL question here is: Will this stack with Webifier Drones? They are a key tool that nearly all pilots constantly use already, and I feel it is important to answer this question ASAP.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17300	Posted - 2016.02.08 10:28:57 - [164] - Quote I'm also against converting officer mods. This new mod is interesting but I'm holding my judgement until I have tested it. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Anthar Thebess 1422	Posted - 2016.02.08 10:31:24 - [165] - Quote Can we get it as a higslot module. This will make things much more interesting. Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists Show your support to The Cause!
big miker Rifterlings Zero.Four Ops 433	Posted - 2016.02.08 10:33:00 - [166] - Quote Zarvox Toral wrote: Cristl wrote: Zarvox Toral wrote: What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach, and the orbital plane this ship is trying to get into is being flipped around randomly with every refresh of the web strength. This is an interesting point. To be honest, could we not have a more sophisticated orbit command? I don't want the game playing itself for me, nor do I want to kill the hamsters with Bessel functions, but it must be possible to program a more intelligent algorithm that prioritises maintaining velocity more highly. A new orbit command, perhaps with the ability to manually set or adjust the orbital plane would be great, but somehow I don't think that's gonna be happening anytime soon. One can only hope. I've thought about this a lot over the past few hours and I really think it's gonna be absolute chaos. Since even infinitesimal adjustments to max velocity can cause massive rotations of the orbital plane (try orbiting something at 500m, then very slightly dropping your velocity, you'll see what I mean, your ship goes mental trying to attain the new orbit) and therefore this new grappler web, will very often cause the target ship to come to an almost complete stop before attempting to settle into a different orbital plane even at 20km away, and since many pilots use the orbit command to tackle, as soon as a tackler is webbed, even at opt+2*falloff (~20km or more), their ship will very often just flat out stop moving while still 20km from the target, slowly pick up velocity only to be stopped/severely slowed again, repeated every two seconds. Unless CCP will be changing the way velocity adjustments cause havoc to your orbit, this is going to be a nightmare for tacklers. Tacklers are going to be blapped ridiculously easily from 20km even though the web effect is tiny at this range, because their ship will be potentially coming to a stop every 2 seconds when the web effect is refreshed, or recalculated, or whatever. I should point out that it's actually great for me, I don't fly tackle in fleets, and when I fly solo BS I know that I can exploit the crap out of this to hugely slow/stop and blap frigs from 20km even with just a t2 grappler, but it does seem super, super broken to me. I feel like I must be missing something though, because it just doesn't make sense that nobody has thought of this. Plenty of people know about disengaging/re-engaging webs in order to provoke the change of orbital plane, reduce transversal briefly and score huge hits, so either a) I'm missing something massive, or b) these webs will be unbelievably overpowered because it's going to reduce transversal far beyond what is implied by the ~85% speed reduction at close range, and will be capable of stopping any orbiting ship in it's tracks every 2 seconds well beyond 20km. I have to disagree on this! Zarvox, even though the web trick may seem like a stupid mechanic for people who primarily use the orbit command, it does seperate the good pilots from bad pilots. Skillfull piloting, or better said manual piloting will always win in situations like that, since manual clicking your orbit path won't get screwed over by the web trick. Tackle pilots who manually pilot their ship like that are lethal! Latest video: Ferocious 8.0 'Officer' Nightmare!
Zarvox Toral Lightly Seared on the Reality Grill Apocalypse Now. 17	Posted - 2016.02.08 10:58:02 - [167] - Quote big miker wrote: Zarvox Toral wrote: Cristl wrote: Zarvox Toral wrote: What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach, and the orbital plane this ship is trying to get into is being flipped around randomly with every refresh of the web strength. This is an interesting point. To be honest, could we not have a more sophisticated orbit command? I don't want the game playing itself for me, nor do I want to kill the hamsters with Bessel functions, but it must be possible to program a more intelligent algorithm that prioritises maintaining velocity more highly. A new orbit command, perhaps with the ability to manually set or adjust the orbital plane would be great, but somehow I don't think that's gonna be happening anytime soon. One can only hope. I've thought about this a lot over the past few hours and I really think it's gonna be absolute chaos. Since even infinitesimal adjustments to max velocity can cause massive rotations of the orbital plane (try orbiting something at 500m, then very slightly dropping your velocity, you'll see what I mean, your ship goes mental trying to attain the new orbit) and therefore this new grappler web, will very often cause the target ship to come to an almost complete stop before attempting to settle into a different orbital plane even at 20km away, and since many pilots use the orbit command to tackle, as soon as a tackler is webbed, even at opt+2*falloff (~20km or more), their ship will very often just flat out stop moving while still 20km from the target, slowly pick up velocity only to be stopped/severely slowed again, repeated every two seconds. Unless CCP will be changing the way velocity adjustments cause havoc to your orbit, this is going to be a nightmare for tacklers. Tacklers are going to be blapped ridiculously easily from 20km even though the web effect is tiny at this range, because their ship will be potentially coming to a stop every 2 seconds when the web effect is refreshed, or recalculated, or whatever. I should point out that it's actually great for me, I don't fly tackle in fleets, and when I fly solo BS I know that I can exploit the crap out of this to hugely slow/stop and blap frigs from 20km even with just a t2 grappler, but it does seem super, super broken to me. I feel like I must be missing something though, because it just doesn't make sense that nobody has thought of this. Plenty of people know about disengaging/re-engaging webs in order to provoke the change of orbital plane, reduce transversal briefly and score huge hits, so either a) I'm missing something massive, or b) these webs will be unbelievably overpowered because it's going to reduce transversal far beyond what is implied by the ~85% speed reduction at close range, and will be capable of stopping any orbiting ship in it's tracks every 2 seconds well beyond 20km. I have to disagree on this! Zarvox, even though the web trick may seem like a stupid mechanic for people who primarily use the orbit command, it does seperate the good pilots from bad pilots. Skillfull piloting, or better said manual piloting will always win in situations like that, since manual clicking your orbit path won't get screwed over by the web trick. Tackle pilots who manually pilot their ship like that are lethal! I don't think this a realistic expectation, any more than simply removing the orbit command would be. It's there for a reason - the vast majority of people aren't Big Miker XD, the vast majority in fact do use this command
Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2277	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:07:32 - [168] - Quote Ncc 1709 wrote: Zhilia Mann wrote: I made a pretty graph on tab 2. This is definitely interesting. For both heated and unheated there's only a narrow window at the edge of normal web range where a normal web is actually better than these. It's an interesting concept. can you do the same for faction web and grapple, and top meta web and grapple please? These calculations are wrong as per #17. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13634	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:21:34 - [169] - Quote It is steadily declining, just like guns. Stats like the 50% at optimal + 1x falloff is simply a sample along that curve used to help illustrate the pattern in text. My OP now has a graph that demonstrates the falloff visually if that helps. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 408	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:43:30 - [170] - Quote This was requested by the players for awhile now, thanks for introducing it. Still waiting for the re-balance of bombs and or bombers versus battleships. Regards, a Freelancer ps: there is no hard counter to the Micro Jump Field Generator, please take that into account Eve online is : A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online D) CCP Games pay More to win at skill training time, now with instant gratification http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

Mystical Might V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 220	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:49:20 - [171] - Quote Freelancer117 wrote: ... ps: there is no hard counter to the Micro Jump Field Generator, please take that into account Have you tried: A) Paying attention B) Tackling said MJFG ship ?? What more do you want in the ways of counters?
Mr Spaxi 54	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:50:29 - [172] - Quote Zarvox Toral wrote: big miker wrote: Zarvox Toral wrote: Cristl wrote: Zarvox Toral wrote: What's going to happen here? If the slowing effect of these new webs is anything like the existing webs, and they increase in strength (therefore gradually decreasing the targets max velocity) as the target gets closer, it seems to me that the target ship is going to be going completely bonkers as its max speed is constantly being adjusted by the increasing web strength during approach, and the orbital plane this ship is trying to get into is being flipped around randomly with every refresh of the web strength. This is an interesting point. To be honest, could we not have a more sophisticated orbit command? I don't want the game playing itself for me, nor do I want to kill the hamsters with Bessel functions, but it must be possible to program a more intelligent algorithm that prioritises maintaining velocity more highly. A new orbit command, perhaps with the ability to manually set or adjust the orbital plane would be great, but somehow I don't think that's gonna be happening anytime soon. One can only hope. I've thought about this a lot over the past few hours and I really think it's gonna be absolute chaos. Since even infinitesimal adjustments to max velocity can cause massive rotations of the orbital plane (try orbiting something at 500m, then very slightly dropping your velocity, you'll see what I mean, your ship goes mental trying to attain the new orbit) and therefore this new grappler web, will very often cause the target ship to come to an almost complete stop before attempting to settle into a different orbital plane even at 20km away, and since many pilots use the orbit command to tackle, as soon as a tackler is webbed, even at opt+2*falloff (~20km or more), their ship will very often just flat out stop moving while still 20km from the target, slowly pick up velocity only to be stopped/severely slowed again, repeated every two seconds. Unless CCP will be changing the way velocity adjustments cause havoc to your orbit, this is going to be a nightmare for tacklers. Tacklers are going to be blapped ridiculously easily from 20km even though the web effect is tiny at this range, because their ship will be potentially coming to a stop every 2 seconds when the web effect is refreshed, or recalculated, or whatever. I should point out that it's actually great for me, I don't fly tackle in fleets, and when I fly solo BS I know that I can exploit the crap out of this to hugely slow/stop and blap frigs from 20km even with just a t2 grappler, but it does seem super, super broken to me. I feel like I must be missing something though, because it just doesn't make sense that nobody has thought of this. Plenty of people know about disengaging/re-engaging webs in order to provoke the change of orbital plane, reduce transversal briefly and score huge hits, so either a) I'm missing something massive, or b) these webs will be unbelievably overpowered because it's going to reduce transversal far beyond what is implied by the ~85% speed reduction at close range, and will be capable of stopping any orbiting ship in it's tracks every 2 seconds well beyond 20km. I have to disagree on this! Zarvox, even though the web trick may seem like a stupid mechanic for people who primarily use the orbit command, it does seperate the good pilots from bad pilots. Skillfull piloting, or better said manual piloting will always win in situations like that, since manual clicking your orbit path won't get screwed over by the web trick. Tackle pilots who manually pilot their ship like that are lethal! I don't think this a realistic expectation, any more than simply removing the orbit command would be. It's there for a reason - the vast majority of people aren't Big Miker XD, the vast majority in fact do use this command But it is. If it weren't, what would separate a pilot who knows how to manually fly and the one who doesn't? Nothing much. Orbit is fine as it is.
ApolloF117 HUN Angels and Demons Inc. Mordus Angels 23	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:50:40 - [173] - Quote Since its a Battleship and capital weaponry, can the Tier 3 Battlecruisers (Talos,Tornado,Oracle,Naga) have bonus to them? like less fitting etc etc
Mr Spaxi 54	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:52:26 - [174] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: There's nothing to elaborate. CCP goes from a All or nothing approach to a All or largely useless to nothing approach with their fall-offs implementation. If it was a steadily declining fall-off (eg. like with weapons), this module would be interesting but with this new 100-50-6% fall-off rubbish that CCP introduced with neuts and remote reps, this module is nigh useless. Fall-off on new modules works the same as with guns. At optimal+1xfalloff you get 50% DPS on a target with 0 transversal.
Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2277	Posted - 2016.02.08 11:55:23 - [175] - Quote Mr Spaxi wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: There's nothing to elaborate. CCP goes from a All or nothing approach to a All or largely useless to nothing approach with their fall-offs implementation. If it was a steadily declining fall-off (eg. like with weapons), this module would be interesting but with this new 100-50-6% fall-off rubbish that CCP introduced with neuts and remote reps, this module is nigh useless. Fall-off on new modules works the same as with guns. At optimal+1xfalloff you get 50% DPS on a target with 0 transversal. That's not how the changed remote reps and neuts work. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
klana depp Tr0pa de elite. Northern Coalition. 3	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:13:37 - [176] - Quote first off, i have to admit that i didnt read thru all of the thread, only glanced over it. so far i cannot think of a single use case for this module; no frigate is gonna get THAT close to your bs/cap anyway. webs are primarily used on ships with webbing bonus, and, for fleets, mostly with range modifying ships.... none of which applies here.. anyway. what i REALLY wanted to say PLEASE DO NOT CONVERT MY OFFICER WEB TO THIS ABOMINATION OR I WILL CRY BIG PANDA TEARS! thanks, thats all.
Sgt Ocker Kenshin. DARKNESS. 809	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:20:00 - [177] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Max Kolonko wrote: So overheated t2 version at 10km have (assuming linear change in power) around 60% web power. So basically You want to stay at >10km and its weaker web and only when he is overheating. After few cycles he will have to turn off overheating and web power falls to little over 40% Incorrect, heat doesn't add strength it adds range which will kind of do what you describe, just not with as much shift in power as you seem to think, however at 10km its strength should be just under 50% but with a two second cycle time and the ability to get stronger as you get closer. So say you get an overheated scram on a guy and throw your deep in fall off grappler on him you can now begin to approach him and as you get closer he'll get webbed harder and harder. In the mean time its got a 2 second cycle time so if you're good at mod management you can probably cycle between targets slowing frigates in scram range for your drones to get on and cycling back onto the primary without him really ever noticing he was unwebbed. So what exactly happens when the guy your doing this to has an overheated scram and fed navy (or even overheated T2) web on you? Unless the plan is to nerf all current webs, these are a nice (in some limited situations) gimick My opinions are mine. If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Electrique Wizard Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals 413	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:39:33 - [178] - Quote I for one can't wait for the new Heavy Grappling Cruisers featuring range / FO bonusses and scripted web bubble. I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
Skia Aumer Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC Desman Alliance 202	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:41:35 - [179] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, and just one per ship. That's not how EVE works. Here, we have fitting requirements and drawbacks, and if I fit 100MN AB on my cruiser - that is my choice. And that is a great part of the game, which I enjoy. Make it require 2000 MW of PG like officer web, or something - I dont care. But dont punish creativity of EVE players. Thank you very much.
ApolloF117 HUN Angels and Demons Inc. Mordus Angels 23	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:45:10 - [180] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, and just one per ship. That's not how EVE works. Here, we have fitting requirements and drawbacks, and if I fit 100MN AB on my cruiser - that is my choice. And that is a great part of the game, which I enjoy. Make it require 2000 MW of PG like officer web, or something - I dont care. But dont punish creativity of EVE players. Thank you very much. nope, this is how fozzie works since incarna

ZagaBoom Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:51:35 - [181] - Quote Niraia wrote: This doesn't make me want to take a battleship out to play any more than faction webs do, and I'm very disappointed that you think otherwise. ^^ This Webs have no counter and are the single most OP form of E-war in the game hands down barred none. So naturally CCP adds more of them. The two or three dudes who will drop blap phoenix are totally loving this. Hell if I thought my dread would be worth fielding after the patch I'd love this exclusively for that. What this really looks like to me though is a bonus to Combat Carriers. If true it shows CCP doesn't entirely hate it's vet community but! I don't see it doing anything more than my fed navy would OH. Quote: (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or strength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). I reach 22.9 in my combat carrier with a fed navy OH and not losing insane applicability of web at range. All in all it feels like another Fozzie Gimick. I can't help but wonder if the game wouldn't be better if we stopped incurring collateral damages derived from new and untested modules/ships. At least until we could prove there was a need for the modules/ships in the first place.
ZagaBoom Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 12:53:57 - [182] - Quote Freelancer117 wrote: This was requested by the players for awhile now, thanks for introducing it. Still waiting for the re-balance of bombs and or bombers versus battleships. Regards, a Freelancer ps: there is no hard counter to the Micro Jump Field Generator, please take that into account I am dieing to know who requested this?
Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2277	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:00:52 - [183] - Quote ZagaBoom wrote: Webs have no counter and are the single most OP form of E-war in the game hands down barred none. So naturally CCP adds more of them. Technically, the counter to webs are Overdrive Injectors, Nanofibers, Afterburners and Microwarpdrives. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
ZagaBoom Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:03:52 - [184] - Quote Rivr Luzade wrote: ZagaBoom wrote: Webs have no counter and are the single most OP form of E-war in the game hands down barred none. So naturally CCP adds more of them. Technically, the counter to webs are Overdrive Injectors, Nanofibers, Afterburners and Microwarpdrives. No they're not. Afterburners you could make an argument for if you're talking about oversized. Otherwise webs are a counter to those modules not the other way around. Two things cannot be counter to each other in perfect harmony in Eve. A warp scrambler cannot be countered by an MWD for example, if you try to say "it can burn away" no then range is the counter to the Scram. All those mods come with inherent penalties to their fitting with exception to the AB. The web does not.
ApolloF117 HUN Angels and Demons Inc. Mordus Angels 23	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:09:57 - [185] - Quote ZagaBoom wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: ZagaBoom wrote: Webs have no counter and are the single most OP form of E-war in the game hands down barred none. So naturally CCP adds more of them. Technically, the counter to webs are Overdrive Injectors, Nanofibers, Afterburners and Microwarpdrives. No they're not. Afterburners you could make an argument for if you're talking about oversized. Otherwise webs are a counter to those modules not the other way around. Two things cannot be counter to each other in perfect harmony in Eve. A warp scrambler cannot be countered by an MWD for example, if you try to say "it can burn away" no then range is the counter to the Scram. All those mods come with inherent penalties to their fitting with exception to the AB. The web does not. When in doubt, use ECM
Mag's Rabble Inc. Rabble Alliance 21259	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:26:01 - [186] - Quote Kenneth Feld wrote: You need to read twitter, Fozzie said it stacks about an hour ago https://twitter.com/GrathTelkin/status/696460014685257728 Yep we definitely need to read twitter and not the official release forum, when we want detailed information. Ignore those that don't have or use Twitter. What were they thinking? As far as the idea is concerned, I'm underwhelmed. Very underwhelmed. Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13635	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:33:26 - [187] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Haven't seen it asked yet but if this module doesn't get bonuses from links or roles applied to it then does it also circumvent the penalties applied to webs in black holes? Our current plan is to extend the black hole effect to impact these modules (as well as webbing fighters and webbing drones). We are aware of potential issues with orbit vectors changing, and are keeping an eye on them. Our internal playtesting has indicated that the effect we're using for this web doesn't generally disrupt orbit vectors by a large margin, but we'll be very interested to see how players find the feel of using these modules and fighting against them using orbit commands once we open up testing on sisi. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Mystical Might V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 220	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:44:45 - [188] - Quote @CCP Fozzie Can you tell us about your / ccps reasoning behind wanting to convert officer webs into these? Also please don't. But it'd be interesting to hear the reasoning, if there is any.
Ncc 1709 Fusion Enterprises Ltd Phoenix Company Alliance 244	Posted - 2016.02.08 13:47:25 - [189] - Quote any chance of increasing the optimal and reducing the overload bonus ? officer grapples should have an increased optimal as well as falloff. also officer webs should stay also, can the button icon for this modual have a effectiveness displayed? so if its only applying 58% on the target, the icon shows 58%
Moac Tor Cyber Core Stain Confederation 419	Posted - 2016.02.08 14:03:49 - [190] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Haven't seen it asked yet but if this module doesn't get bonuses from links or roles applied to it then does it also circumvent the penalties applied to webs in black holes? Our current plan is to extend the black hole effect to impact these modules (as well as webbing fighters and webbing drones). We are aware of potential issues with orbit vectors changing, and are keeping an eye on them. Our internal playtesting has indicated that the effect we're using for this web doesn't generally disrupt orbit vectors by a large margin, but we'll be very interested to see how players find the feel of using these modules and fighting against them using orbit commands once we open up testing on sisi. if they do end up disrupting orbit vectors it would bring them up to balance as on paper they are a little underwhelming Modulated ECM Effects An Alternative to Skill Trading


CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13636	Posted - 2016.02.08 14:12:46 - [191] - Quote So we have confirmed in the code why these modules cause less of a orbit vector disruption than one might expect. It's actually a very unintuitive mechanic behind the scenes, far from ideal. The upshot is that although this isn't a big deal for the Grapplers (since they only cause very slight orbit changes), we may found have an easy solution to the general case of orbit vector changing drastically when webbed or when you turn on a prop mod. Still doing some testing and investigating. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2277	Posted - 2016.02.08 14:38:50 - [192] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: So we have confirmed in the code why these modules cause less of a orbit vector disruption than one might expect. It's actually a very unintuitive mechanic behind the scenes, far from ideal. The upshot is that although this isn't a big deal for the Grapplers (since they only cause very slight orbit changes), we may found have an easy solution to the general case of orbit vector changing drastically when webbed or when you turn on a prop mod. Still doing some testing and investigating. No more 180-¦ degree U-turns when I turn on/off the AB would be really appreciated. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Ele Rebellion Dead Star Syndicate 64	Posted - 2016.02.08 15:34:28 - [193] - Quote one question. Vindicator?
Longdrinks Leather Club Paisti Syndicate 225	Posted - 2016.02.08 15:40:14 - [194] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: So we have confirmed in the code why these modules cause less of a orbit vector disruption than one might expect. It's actually a very unintuitive mechanic behind the scenes, far from ideal. The upshot is that although this isn't a big deal for the Grapplers (since they only cause very slight orbit changes), we may found have an easy solution to the general case of orbit vector changing drastically when webbed or when you turn on a prop mod. Still doing some testing and investigating. Fixing that would take away the advantage a experience player gets from piloting their own ship vs a noob just pressing orbit button. Please dont take away mechanics that allow higher skilled players to shine.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2568	Posted - 2016.02.08 15:41:23 - [195] - Quote Ele Rebellion wrote: one question. Vindicator? One answer, read the OP.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 744	Posted - 2016.02.08 15:45:42 - [196] - Quote i think it has potential, as there are a lot of people who will ramboi a Battleship in a svipul or other T3D/Frigate. I still see this as a bigger buff to missile BS, as turret BS still have to deal with tracking, and even with 85% reduction @ 1km (for t2), there is still the potential for smaller ships to sig tank them pretty easily. Or they could just hang out at 8-9km, scram kiting. But using this on a torpedo typhoon could have devastating effects on brawling cruisers and certain frigs (if you fit for max application). Which is a good thing. On the other hand, i'm still alittle split on how a turret BS will make good use of it. Up close, having to deal with sig resolution of the turret+tracking will still make it tricky to hit smaller targets (as intended). So, missile BS were already in a decent spot, and it seems like this is a buff to them, but turret BS might still struggle slightly. Especially with low speed on BS. Even with a t2 100mn AB, most BS barely manage to get by 300-400m/s. Thats not much to range control with, especially against T3D's. Even with a 85% web. This doesn't touch on the fact other BS might still need a physical rebalance. Things like the tempest fleet doing less dmg than T1. The fleet phoon's gun bonus is all but useless when you have the T1 pest, or the pest FI that offer better turret bonuses/utility. I'm sure there are others, but those are right off the top of my head. Then we still have the issue with sensor strength being a tad low, when a single griffin or set of EC300's can permajam a BS. Even with ECCM. Although this could just be more related to how poor RNG is used in an EWAR. Not to mention bombs/bombers needing rebalance. I think the module has potential, but also don't want to see it as a band-aid to fix an ailing ship class, which has issues with more things than just fighting small ships. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
FT Cold The Scope Gallente Federation 38	Posted - 2016.02.08 16:05:30 - [197] - Quote If orbital vector recalculation is still a thing when these are implemented they're going to be insanely powerful. Otherwise, these are probably going to be limited blaster, AC and missile hulls. I'm a little mixed on this, I think I'd rather have a comprehensive rebalance of the class first.
Soldarius O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore 1459	Posted - 2016.02.08 16:56:19 - [198] - Quote Zappity wrote: Kenneth Feld wrote: Zappity wrote: Just to be clear, this doesn't stack with normal webs? Very cool idea. I like. Why wouldn't it stack? No different then having 2 webs on a huginn Because Fozzie wrote, "It's seperate from existing Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses...and no benefit from gang links." That sounds like it is in a new meta group so it is very possible it won't stack. Stacking penalties are not about meta group. They are about effect. If two or more EWAR modules grant the same effect, they are usually stacking penalized. See TP or web drones. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Mornak Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE 82	Posted - 2016.02.08 17:14:59 - [199] - Quote I like it. In small gangs they could be quite usefull. If you bring more than one, they add up to usefull strength even deep in falloff. Range[km]: 18.5km 21.5km 23.5km Str.[%]: 20 10 5 stacking 2: 37.2 18.6 9.3 stacking 3: 48.62 24.31 12.155 stacking 5: 56.4 28.2 14.1 (approx.readout of OP's graph, hope the math checks out) They're also quite powerful in collaboration with MJDs/MJFG, given proper piloting skill is involved.
ApolloF117 HUN Angels and Demons Inc. Mordus Angels 23	Posted - 2016.02.08 17:20:37 - [200] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: i think it has potential, as there are a lot of people who will ramboi a Battleship in a svipul or other T3D/Frigate. I still see this as a bigger buff to missile BS, as turret BS still have to deal with tracking, and even with 85% reduction @ 1km (for t2), there is still the potential for smaller ships to sig tank them pretty easily. Or they could just hang out at 8-9km, scram kiting. But using this on a torpedo typhoon could have devastating effects on brawling cruisers and certain frigs (if you fit for max application). Which is a good thing. On the other hand, i'm still alittle split on how a turret BS will make good use of it. Up close, having to deal with sig resolution of the turret+tracking will still make it tricky to hit smaller targets (as intended). So, missile BS were already in a decent spot, and it seems like this is a buff to them, but turret BS might still struggle slightly. Especially with low speed on BS. Even with a t2 100mn AB, most BS barely manage to get by 300-400m/s. Thats not much to range control with, especially against T3D's. Even with a 85% web. This doesn't touch on the fact other BS might still need a physical rebalance. Things like the tempest fleet doing less dmg than T1. The fleet phoon's gun bonus is all but useless when you have the T1 pest, or the pest FI that offer better turret bonuses/utility. I'm sure there are others, but those are right off the top of my head. Then we still have the issue with sensor strength being a tad low, when a single griffin or set of EC300's can permajam a BS. Even with ECCM. Although this could just be more related to how poor RNG is used in an EWAR. Not to mention bombs/bombers needing rebalance. I think the module has potential, but also don't want to see it as a band-aid to fix an ailing ship class, which has issues with more things than just fighting small ships. please show me a typhoon fitt that is torpedo fitted , full aply and viable in solo pvp

Rivr Luzade Kenshin. DARKNESS. 2277	Posted - 2016.02.08 17:27:25 - [201] - Quote Longdrinks wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: So we have confirmed in the code why these modules cause less of a orbit vector disruption than one might expect. It's actually a very unintuitive mechanic behind the scenes, far from ideal. The upshot is that although this isn't a big deal for the Grapplers (since they only cause very slight orbit changes), we may found have an easy solution to the general case of orbit vector changing drastically when webbed or when you turn on a prop mod. Still doing some testing and investigating. Fixing that would take away the advantage a experience player gets from piloting their own ship vs a noob just pressing orbit button. Please dont take away mechanics that allow higher skilled players to shine. This behavior has nothing to do with skilled piloting. It's plain ridiculous; the fix of that behavior is actually something CCP should have done long ago to actually improve the game. UI Improvement Collective My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 744	Posted - 2016.02.08 17:28:17 - [202] - Quote ApolloF117 HUN wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: i think it has potential, as there are a lot of people who will ramboi a Battleship in a svipul or other T3D/Frigate. I still see this as a bigger buff to missile BS, as turret BS still have to deal with tracking, and even with 85% reduction @ 1km (for t2), there is still the potential for smaller ships to sig tank them pretty easily. Or they could just hang out at 8-9km, scram kiting. But using this on a torpedo typhoon could have devastating effects on brawling cruisers and certain frigs (if you fit for max application). Which is a good thing. On the other hand, i'm still alittle split on how a turret BS will make good use of it. Up close, having to deal with sig resolution of the turret+tracking will still make it tricky to hit smaller targets (as intended). So, missile BS were already in a decent spot, and it seems like this is a buff to them, but turret BS might still struggle slightly. Especially with low speed on BS. Even with a t2 100mn AB, most BS barely manage to get by 300-400m/s. Thats not much to range control with, especially against T3D's. Even with a 85% web. This doesn't touch on the fact other BS might still need a physical rebalance. Things like the tempest fleet doing less dmg than T1. The fleet phoon's gun bonus is all but useless when you have the T1 pest, or the pest FI that offer better turret bonuses/utility. I'm sure there are others, but those are right off the top of my head. Then we still have the issue with sensor strength being a tad low, when a single griffin or set of EC300's can permajam a BS. Even with ECCM. Although this could just be more related to how poor RNG is used in an EWAR. Not to mention bombs/bombers needing rebalance. I think the module has potential, but also don't want to see it as a band-aid to fix an ailing ship class, which has issues with more things than just fighting small ships. please show me a typhoon fitt that is torpedo fitted , full aply and viable in solo pvp [Typhoon, Torp] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II 1600mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates Internal Force Field Array I 1600mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates Federation Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane Adaptive Nano Plating II Large Micro Jump Drive Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo Torpedo Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Torpedo Heavy Gremlin Compact Energy Neutralizer Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Trimark Armor Pump I Large Warhead Rigor Catalyst I Hammerhead II x5 Valkyrie II x5 Acolyte II x5 With crash booster, applies about 300 dps to the standard dual MSE svipul (before drones). Applies perfectly to pretty much any cruiser. About 95k EHP as well. Before you go on about the plates, the fit/ship is meant to get in, apply a lot of damage in a short time and moonwalk out with MJD. I've used almost an identical setup with RHML and it works fine. Just swap one of the webs in the fit with the grappler, and now i've got even better application against ships. You can even see video's of me using the RHML phoon with dual plates. So yes, its a viable solo fit, meant for a specific role. Blap scrams and peace out. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Rek Seven Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 2144	Posted - 2016.02.08 17:29:30 - [203] - Quote It sounds like a good module to catch smaller things but in reality, smaller ships will probably still be able to pull away from you when you are using a grappler in deep falloff. A new module for a new mechanic would have been better. I was hoping for a Ship Tractor Beam but i guess the code is too broken. The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2909	Posted - 2016.02.08 18:24:45 - [204] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: It sounds like a good module to catch smaller things but in reality, smaller ships will probably still be able to pull away from you when you are using a grappler in deep falloff. A new module for a new mechanic would have been better. I was hoping for a Ship Tractor Beam but i guess the code is too broken. For turret boats, the farther they get away the better the application is without webs. And for any ship not using linked faction webs, it still helps.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2571	Posted - 2016.02.08 18:43:45 - [205] - Quote If they ever complete the E-WAR battleship class to make the scorpion not so much of a special snowflake, the minmatar one could have bonus to this instead of regular webs. Who knows...
Mr Grape Drink Sugar - Water - Purple Who. 82	Posted - 2016.02.08 19:16:26 - [206] - Quote nvm D:
Gabriel Karade Noir. Mercenary Coalition 299	Posted - 2016.02.08 19:20:09 - [207] - Quote ArmyOfMe wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Gabriel Karade wrote: dusts off trusty old blasterthron hyperion is better in every way except sig radius Some of us are just nostalgic This man gets it. FU Hyperion lovers! War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Krevnos Back Door Burglars The Otherworld 56	Posted - 2016.02.08 19:38:13 - [208] - Quote While these modules have potential, failing to apply ship specific bonuses to them largely negates the relative effectiveness of web based ships. This is further exacerbated by the planned conversion of what are currently good officer modules into what will be effectively useless modules to certain ship types post-patch. I would make two suggestions based on my personal observations: 1. Allow some bonus to these modules for web reliant ships. The current plans for exclusion make no practical sense. 2. Create new officer modules as appropriate rather than convert the current ones (frankly it's lazy to do that). This will allow players to make a choice based on their personal preference as they can in lower tiers (why remove that choice?).
Sakido Cain Duragon Pioneer Group Goonswarm Federation 5	Posted - 2016.02.08 20:33:51 - [209] - Quote Personally I find the lack of hull bonus application rather disappointing. Bhaalgorn's would not see any value in this, and the Vindi looses its only solid advantage (yes it is a DPS monster, but its also rather short range). Speaking of the Vindi, with a modual like this, it will now be even harder for it to get into range, as any other ship can slow it down enough to keep out of its rather small death bubble (Fed Navy Web range) where it can finally over take it's prey. The Vindi is already hard to fit, so trying to place an extra web that isn't bonused is not worth it. This modual basically gives even more advantage to Machs, and to a lesser degree ships like amarr, which have good range and solid tracking. Also, while these are "small gang" intended, even small gang and "solo" (yeah right) gangs/pilots use boosters, which makes regular webs massively more effective. Having web ranges of more than 24k, at regular strength will trump a web that gets no bonuses and falloff penalties. I actually like the idea of webs with falloff, but they have to be able to compete with what is currently in the game, or what is currently available would have to be removed. Also the grapples would need to have the same to better falloff than current webs. The idea is sound, but they need to be a truly competitive modual vs what we have, or it will suffer the same fate as other good ideas that had bad implementation (ex: reactive armor hardener, a great modual, after the cap change and knowing not to over train the skill). If you put this item into the game as it is stated now, it will not see true use for some time, after it gets adjusted to better suit combat and also slowly is accepted by the community after having been scoffed at for a year plus. This was seen in items, like the reactive armor hardener, which took a rather long time to be accepted as a valuable hardener, even though, it is rather strong when used right, but it had been shunned by the player base, due to poor balance of cap usage. Personally, if this was my brainchild, I would want it to hit the market and be desirable, rather than spending a lot of time in development, only to be shunned.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2575	Posted - 2016.02.08 20:59:36 - [210] - Quote Krevnos wrote: While these modules have potential, failing to apply ship specific bonuses to them largely negates the relative effectiveness of web based ships. This is further exacerbated by the planned conversion of what are currently good officer modules into what will be effectively useless modules to certain ship types post-patch. A vindicator that reduce your speed by 127.5% in optimal probably does wonky things with the code.

Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 745	Posted - 2016.02.08 22:06:13 - [211] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Krevnos wrote: While these modules have potential, failing to apply ship specific bonuses to them largely negates the relative effectiveness of web based ships. This is further exacerbated by the planned conversion of what are currently good officer modules into what will be effectively useless modules to certain ship types post-patch. A vindicator that reduce your speed by 127.5% in optimal probably does wonky things with the code. I'd be ok if a vindicator/vigilant/daredevil tried to web me and it repelled me away from him. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Alexis Nightwish 404	Posted - 2016.02.08 23:30:41 - [212] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We currently plan on converting existing officer webifiers into the officer versions of these new modules. Why? Do you like taking options away from players? So now anyone who uses officer webs on a non-BS/capital gets shafted, and anyone who does use them on a BS/capital now gets an inferior module. CCP Fozzie wrote: We don't intend these modules to completely replace normal webs for Battleship use. Yes you do. Any Vindi pilot with officer webs just got their awesome, bonused module replaced with an unbonused grappler. CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Alexis Nightwish 404	Posted - 2016.02.08 23:36:48 - [213] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. You should feel dumb for thinking that capitals should be able to solo subcaps. CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 55	Posted - 2016.02.09 00:08:51 - [214] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. You should feel dumb for thinking that capitals should be able to solo subcaps. I have seen the Local Phoenix pilot solo fleets in my area all the time, I see Battleships breaking 20 man camps, so you should all feel dumb.. No? Cause you know, it happens, and you saying it can't.. When there is proof.. Yeah.. Also, comparing these on a Vindi is pointless do to the range limit, I mean they are inferior to the Vinidi's standard untill you get within 2-3km of the Vindi, and honestly, who the hell in EVE tries to outbrawl a Vindi without knowing he can smash it? No one, so your point is in revelent, and even on a Bhaal, if the numbers about this module stay, it will have what.. 5-7km Optimal? OMG.. That is ground breaking, those 1 or 2 ships will have to brawl down the Bhaal who has to sacrfice a Large Neut, or a Plate or a Prop mod just to get around this things fitting Restrictions, Webs should scale, this is a good step towards making sure that a ship with more power then a nuclear power plant has a little stronger systems then a bloody Frigate, anyone who thinks Webs from a BS should be the same strength as a Frigates is a idiot, or but hurt that their pathetic OP Svipuls will die in droves now when they try to brawl a battleship. 1km Optimal with under 10km Falloff isn't a great range guys, it is OP, it won't replace the 30km Webs that Rapiers and things get, it will be used mostly in Small Gang, and in the rare occassion Fleet fights, I can see a squad of Mega's or something similar landing on the enemy Logi or Anchor and hitting it will a few of these modules and then killing it with the fleet, but you can complain about that when we have modules that jump fleets 100km in random directs, haha! (Being MJD by a unfriendly is so fun, means you get a fight that more dedicate too!)
Alexis Nightwish 404	Posted - 2016.02.09 00:53:08 - [215] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Formosus Funus wrote: Cool new mod, but this really should be a AOE module. Or is that a role for perhaps a Command Destroyer kind of shiptype? But I do believe it should be AOE. Once it was actually an art in PVP to get under the guns, even while being webbed at 90%. However, over time smaller ships got their speed increased, and it has become an art to actually hit something which is in low orbit. And achieve what? Creating squads of instawarping cruisers or whatever? Emergency warpouts for whole fleets if ** goes ** up? If this module was aoe I think every gank fleet in existence would want one. Every fleet of any imaginable composition would want them in pairs to immediately slingshot their whole fleet since it has 2second cycle it wears offf straight away too. Imagibe slippery petes with these. Or svipul gangs or literally any fleet ever. In brief you idea is terrible. How many Pete or Svipul fleets include battleships? CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 55	Posted - 2016.02.09 01:14:00 - [216] - Quote You have never roamed with my Spectre Fleets, I always fly a Mega, and generally it is the fleet that slows me down, I have better Warp Speed then Cruisers on my default build and better Align then any Cruiser, and i haven't lost any of my proper fits yet, I have lost comedic ones (Triple Prop, that was a stupid dare, and a Shield fit.. Really wanted to go on a roam, but only Shield roams where running that day, I moved.. Way to fast..), but yeah, not Pete's though, But T3D Fleets, T2 and T1 Cruisers, Battlecruiser fleets, hell even some Ceptor/Frigate roams, you will see me FC'ing in my Mega, it's fun, and since I keep up with the fleet, there is no issue bringing it, and I have 3 times the tank minimum of a Cruiser and 2 times the DPS, hell, when I heat the MWD I move faster then any Armor Cruiser while having the tank and DPS I do, so yeah :) in case you didn't notice, I like Mega's!
ZagaBoom Nocturnal Romance Cynosural Field Theory. 1	Posted - 2016.02.09 02:01:08 - [217] - Quote Alexis Nightwish wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. You should feel dumb for thinking that capitals should be able to solo subcaps. On the idea that capitals "can" solo sub capitals. That's not exactly fair. In order for a capital to solo a subcapital it cannot in any reality fight a capital. By your logic a frigate should not be able to kill a battleship then? Or is it Frigates > Cruisers > Battlecruisers > Battleships > Capitals > Super Capitals > Titans? Seems literally inverted to me? Or should nothing be able to "solo" a ship category apart from itself? Once you start saying "this should be able to fight that and not this" You start to take a lot of sandbox away no? If I fit a RHM Typh and I rig and fit it for missile damage application and I don't hit my target I think I'd be annoyed. Since if I tried to fight a Torp fit Typh or even a Cruise fit Typh I'd probs get my poop pushed in. Fitting is the balance. Fit for the role. Don't say the hull can't do the job no matter what though. That's not sandbox. I have logistics ships and industrials that I pvp in. Hell I have a freaking Battle Rorqual. Yes I PVP IN A FREAKING RORQUAL. Why don't we see fleets of roaming Blap Phoenixs? Why has no one roamed with a Leviathan? It's because Blap dreads are suicide. Brawl or bust. Also roaming Levi would require massive balls. On the topic of the dreads though! You're basically guaranteed to lose the dread. You're stuck for five minutes with nothing but a token tank. The # of videos you see of guys wrecking in blap dreads... welp ask them for the videos where the fights don't turn out so well. I'm tired of people trying to limit what ships can do. Let the fit and the role dictate it's use not predetermined boxes that you can check to see if you have the right counter setup. "dreads should only shoot capitals" is about as dumb as saying "Guardians should only rep battleships" or "Talos can't bait" I assure you Talos bait cyno is both hilarious and effective. Capitals SHOULD be able to fight sub-capitals. Sub-capitals SHOULD be able to fight capitals.
Adam Lyon Incident Command Local Is Primary 15	Posted - 2016.02.09 02:52:09 - [218] - Quote Personally not a fan. At least in lowsec when some solo BS comes swagging in, all of the good ones are fit with MJD meaning you've got to get hard tackle for any hope of a kill. I personally really like the idea of some newbro in an executioner being able to be the hero of the fight and I see this module very much killing that idea. So long as getting under the guns without needing an A-Type Dramiel is still possible after the release of this module, I wouldn't mind seeing more yolomeisters trying their hand at solo BS in lowsec EDIT: I love the subtle admission of outright cancer the guy above me talks about when he says Garmur > any frigate. So glad 60km points exist.
Alundil Isogen 5 1088	Posted - 2016.02.09 04:06:27 - [219] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Krevnos wrote: While these modules have potential, failing to apply ship specific bonuses to them largely negates the relative effectiveness of web based ships. This is further exacerbated by the planned conversion of what are currently good officer modules into what will be effectively useless modules to certain ship types post-patch. A vindicator that reduce your speed by 127.5% in optimal probably does wonky things with the code. Given the track record with things like this, I'm sure it would have been hilarious. Ccplsgib I'm right behind you
bunzing heet Sex and Coke Party 13	Posted - 2016.02.09 04:25:59 - [220] - Quote is this grappler intended to give bss the much needed buff they need ? and are you guys planning on doing more to bss in the near future because this module will only provide a limited amount of bss a boost and most of them still need tweaking Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!

Piraal Viziam Amarr Empire 8	Posted - 2016.02.09 09:23:02 - [221] - Quote Proof that Fozzie is not a frigate?
Maraner The Executioners Shadow Cartel 345	Posted - 2016.02.09 09:53:13 - [222] - Quote @CCP Fozzie. Interesting module. there has been some talk about this module being useful for small gangs of roaming BS. I cannot seriously remember the last time I ran across a small gang of roaming BS. They move too slowly because of a dumb ass nerf to warp speed. They had been trucking along at 3AU since the start of the game and all of a sudden they don't. the module seems to me to be an attempt to buff the class which is welcome since the only BS I see these days routinely is the Mach which has ...surprise surpirse a higher warp speed than all of the others. By all means add this module, I suspect the Blops guys will love it, but look at the class as a whole as well please.
Mr Hyde113 ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 268	Posted - 2016.02.09 13:02:01 - [223] - Quote Quote: F -- riends, pilots, capsuleers, lend me your ears! Today we're ready to discuss a new module that we are planning on r -- eleasing in our March patch. I -- 'm excited to see how you creative pilots take advantage of them, esp solo/small gang BS pilots who should g -- et a lot of value from them. The Stasis Grappler module is a new class of web that has high strength, low optimal a -- nd high falloff. It will be the first webifier-type module to use falloff, which will reduce the strength of the web as t -- he range increases. This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, and just one per ship. It's seperate from e -- xisting Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or s -- trength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). Mr Hyde - Candidate for CSM XI Youtube Channel Twitter
Vulfen Snuff Box Snuffed Out 182	Posted - 2016.02.09 13:07:49 - [224] - Quote Not giving these bonuses from even links seems lame to me. Basicly if you don't run links use these if your do run webs. if your not going to give them that then extend thier range in falloff by 5k per module. though i do have to say i like the concept it needs some work.
Master Sergeant MacRobert Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 258	Posted - 2016.02.09 13:57:49 - [225] - Quote Who is faction 1 and who is faction 2? (no time to read the whole thread if this has been asked/answered). "Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 13686	Posted - 2016.02.09 17:59:11 - [226] - Quote Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Masao Kurata Perkone Caldari State 336	Posted - 2016.02.09 18:03:42 - [227] - Quote Good decision re. leaving officer webs alone. Still not sure these even need faction variants.
Mystical Might V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 221	Posted - 2016.02.09 18:57:13 - [228] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! Thank you Fozzie. Now, about those openings for Grapplers. Could always do C through X type in place of officer modules; less rare, more use, less cost for the average battleship (Which is, presumably, what you want, right?) Just don't do officers + Deadspace, because officers are made almost redundant by the introduction of deadspace modules - Neuts are a perfect example.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1256	Posted - 2016.02.09 19:16:21 - [229] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! considering the stats for officer webs suits the new mods more .. it seems odd too leave them as is.. T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 460	Posted - 2016.02.09 19:20:07 - [230] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! :swoon: the dev of my heart

EvilweaselFinance BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation 784	Posted - 2016.02.09 20:39:48 - [231] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! Why can't you just introduce the proposed officer grapplers, but without converting existing ones? What's the rationale behind only one of them having officer mods?
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Fidelas Constans 587	Posted - 2016.02.09 20:51:51 - [232] - Quote EvilweaselFinance wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! Why can't you just introduce the proposed officer grapplers, but without converting existing ones? What's the rationale behind only one of them having officer mods? Effort. Easier to change item than to add new, add it to relevant market groups, add it to loot tables of relevant oficers. Etc... Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Noxisia Arkana Deadspace Knights Sacred Empire of Ellyssium 430	Posted - 2016.02.09 22:36:19 - [233] - Quote Hey, I looked over this - and it doesn't seem to add a lot into the game (we have webs). Is this more of an experiment into strengths of ewar resistance / optimal falloff for ewar? If not, I don't see this as a solid step in understanding the issues that have (and will after dread gun changes) affect battleships and to a lesser extent dreads. The module doesn't get close to dealing with the issues that battleships have. As a pilot that has enjoyed flying battleships for a large part of my eve career... I've pretty much given them up from a pvp perspective. Their warp speed, sig, maneuverability coupled with application issues against smaller targets (most targets) makes them pretty undesirable. If this was a discussion around a role bonus that would make them useful... I feel like we would be heading in the right direction. While battle-cruisers have gained in popularity because of their range bonus - a different bonus would certainly help bring the battleship into some kind of relevance. For now, I'll continue to fly HACs, HICs, T3s, Pirate ships, and battle cruisers because of the smaller differences in effective hitpoints and applied damage. There are some obvious exceptions in the battleship category like the Macherial and Rattlesnake but for the most part - unless you're running c1-c4 sites, ratting, or mission running - they provide little purpose. I'd rather not see a new module that duplicates existing features and see the ship class itself worked on.
Aliventi Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies. 915	Posted - 2016.02.09 23:49:03 - [234] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! Yay! Vindicators and Bhaalgorns rejoice. You should just add the officer heavy stasis grapplers anyway.
Alundil Isogen 5 1089	Posted - 2016.02.10 00:16:12 - [235] - Quote penifSMASH wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey folks. After hearing your feedback we've decided to keep officer webs in the standard stasis webifier category rather than converting them into grapplers. We'll leave the officer slots for these new modules open for now, with the option of adding new officer grapplers down the line if the interest is high enough. Thanks for the feedback so far and keep it coming! :swoon: the dev of my heart not empty quoting I'm right behind you
Atomeon The Scope Gallente Federation 67	Posted - 2016.02.10 01:33:40 - [236] - Quote Its a Battleship (and higher) module, but its crap as you introduce it. It should be stronger, more optimal less falloff
Hiljah Foo Holdings AL3XAND3R. 21	Posted - 2016.02.10 05:46:53 - [237] - Quote I love it. Especially with the range bonus Nidhoggers will get to it. I'm looking forward to the damper, ecm, and disruptor versions of this.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17319	Posted - 2016.02.10 11:48:10 - [238] - Quote Hiljah wrote: I love it. Especially with the range bonus Nidhoggers will get to it. I'm looking forward to the damper, ecm, and disruptor versions of this. No bonuses bud Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Captain Campion Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North 9	Posted - 2016.02.10 13:50:53 - [239] - Quote Could you look at the range of webs and scrams please? Currently, if approaching, you can activate your web before your scram, and that's the opposite of what you want to do.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2584	Posted - 2016.02.10 14:01:35 - [240] - Quote Captain Campion wrote: Could you look at the range of webs and scrams please? Currently, if approaching, you can activate your web before your scram, and that's the opposite of what you want to do. You could always not do it...

Umino Iruka Ultramar Independent Contracting 9	Posted - 2016.02.10 14:04:51 - [241] - Quote If your intention here is to REALLY help battleships, the range on these things needs to be fixed. The fitting requirements for this thing AND the fact that it's supposed to be exclusive for battleships and larger ships, means it actually needs to have decent stats or these will get used only during the initial hype when they get released (much like target spectrum breakers). Get out of your current train of thought which pushes you to give us useless things or conditionally useful things! We don't need size specific webs which perform worse than their normal variants - add the current overheat range bonus into it's normal range value and reduce the overheat bonus to something like 50% (T2 = 4km unheated optimal + 10km falloff and 6km heated optimal + 10km falloff) - it also wouldn't hurt to add 1-2 km extra falloff on faction variants either because no hull/boost bonuses are allowed.... This new web type is not a bad idea, but I really feel you need to start fixing hulls and weapon systems/ammo types instead of inventing hull dependant modules which are supposed to do it instead. You are destroying much of the fitting varieties by forcing certain modules to be fitted onto certain hulls just to make the hulls viable to use.
Ethlinda Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 0	Posted - 2016.02.10 18:10:58 - [242] - Quote ya know this is cool and all. its about 8 years to late tho. these new modules need to be MUCH stronger. these arent frigates or cruisers. their for battleships. If you intending to help battleships in their solo/small gang they need to have modules that actually help them. this is worse than a web and battleships need to fit 2 webs or none at all. this wont help the normal badass battleships like abaddon get back into the small gang arena. they need stronger velocity reduction. battleship tracking is garbage
Gizznitt Malikite Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 4266	Posted - 2016.02.10 18:59:39 - [243] - Quote As a small ship pilot, I find this module fairly disconcerting. BS's already have many choices available to allow them to take on small ships, why do they need more? Neuts with falloff now lets them drain even max orbiting inties, MJD's provide a "get in scram range or they get away" option, and now we are removing their Achilles Heel to close orbiting small ships. Grapplers have stronger strength and longer range than webs, which pragmatically implies that BS's will use them exclusively. A Grappled frig will move at 15% of max velocity, allowing BS weapons to apply significant damage to all but AB'ing frigs. I fear that 85% is too strong, but perhaps it is appropriate in some larger scheme that I am not seeing yet. Do you have any enlightenment on this?
Hiljah Foo Holdings AL3XAND3R. 21	Posted - 2016.02.10 19:12:20 - [244] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Hiljah wrote: I love it. Especially with the range bonus Nidhoggers will get to it. I'm looking forward to the damper, ecm, and disruptor versions of this. No bonuses bud No bonuses from web bonuses. Watch the Nid get a grapple bonus.
Chill'4 Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2016.02.10 20:22:42 - [245] - Quote This is a cool new module and plenty strong enough in its current proposed form, however id like to raise a couple things. Almost every Battleship will be silly not to fit one of these, so now we have less variation between fits. Also as most people will pair these with MJD's and choose to brawl, we end up with less variation between the ship hulls themselves. These will definetly give Battleships a boost but imo should not be considered a fix or even part of a fix. Reason being is its treating a 'symptom' and not the cause/causes of the problem.
Arya Regnar Darwins Right Hand 911	Posted - 2016.02.11 02:58:23 - [246] - Quote Gizznitt Malikite wrote: As a small ship pilot, I find this module fairly disconcerting. BS's already have many choices available to allow them to take on small ships, why do they need more? Neuts with falloff now lets them drain even max orbiting inties, MJD's provide a "get in scram range or they get away" option, and now we are removing their Achilles Heel to close orbiting small ships. Grapplers have stronger strength and longer range than webs, which pragmatically implies that BS's will use them exclusively. A Grappled frig will move at 15% of max velocity, allowing BS weapons to apply significant damage to all but AB'ing frigs. I fear that 85% is too strong, but perhaps it is appropriate in some larger scheme that I am not seeing yet. Do you have any enlightenment on this? Tbh I am quite fine with battleships wrecking frigs every now and then. This coming from a guy who almost never flies battleships. EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Mystical Might V0LTA WE FORM V0LTA 221	Posted - 2016.02.11 07:11:53 - [247] - Quote Since grapplers will work out to 2x falloff (roughly 23km+ for T2) I see no validation in the arguments of those asking for more optimal range. That isn't exactly what it's for, it isn't meant to challenge normal webs. I don't think they quite understand that; by having a difference in optimal ranges and a falloff bonus, it provides c h o i c e boiz. You're not forced to fit this if you think the optimal isn't strong enough, but you'd be ignoring the silly (unlinked, unbonused) range that it gets. If the thought of not having a normal web hurts so bad, just fit a normal web in conjunction with these things. Also Fozzie please don't scrap officer or deadspace grapplers - those are something I look forward to. I just think it best to introduce new ones, not convert what already exists. Ya know, further encourage choices.
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc 1985	Posted - 2016.02.11 21:24:29 - [248] - Quote Really cool module for a really cool concept. Any chance for us to get those on T1 and T2 battlecruisers as well? Including attack. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Retired Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - Ex-BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Lugh Crow-Slave 1555	Posted - 2016.02.11 23:02:13 - [249] - Quote will bonuses to webs also effect grapples? Citadel worm hole tax
Iyacia Cyric'ai Stimulus Rote Kapelle 187	Posted - 2016.02.12 00:25:53 - [250] - Quote Looking forward to wrecking close orbiting frigs and t3ds. +1

Mad Abbat Talon Swarm 36	Posted - 2016.02.12 00:32:01 - [251] - Quote So whats about help in application to Conflag L (15km) and Scorch L (40km) boats, both are ammo for close range weapon system, both have hard time appying it DPS at optimal range vs any sub BS targets. both standard webs and grapples are not up to the job. Comments?
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 14124	Posted - 2016.02.12 00:39:17 - [252] - Quote Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: will bonuses to webs also effect grapples? no Better the Devil you know. =]\|[=
Krevnos Back Door Burglars The Otherworld 56	Posted - 2016.02.12 01:03:37 - [253] - Quote I'm sorry, Fozzie, in their current iteration these modules just aren't cutting muster. I will explain myself below: 1. They do not benefit from gang links which are employed by huge numbers of players. Gang links skew the optimal range of standard webifiers to the right. 2. Ships that boast stasis webifier bonuses do not apply any bonus to these new modules, leaving these modules as orphans. I expect that these modules will become a niche unit, employed in rare ship setups.
Lugh Crow-Slave 1555	Posted - 2016.02.12 01:34:43 - [254] - Quote Krevnos wrote: I'm sorry, Fozzie, in their current iteration these modules just aren't cutting muster. I will explain myself below: 1. They do not benefit from gang links which are employed by huge numbers of players. Gang links skew the optimal range of standard webifiers to the right. 2. Ships that boast stasis webifier bonuses do not apply any bonus to these new modules, leaving these modules as orphans. I expect that these modules will become a niche unit, employed in rare ship setups. i can see blops using them i can also see them being used in conjunction with tractor beams during citadel fights Citadel worm hole tax
Xercodo Xovoni Directorate 4302	Posted - 2016.02.12 02:15:02 - [255] - Quote I'm also going to agree with the range problems, these still don't appear to be viable over a faction web besides cost. If someone has the ISK to throw at a wall faction webs will remain ideal unless faction grapplers have the same curve over their web counterparts and the same price tag. The range needs to be high enough that the curve completely beats the web counterpart of the same meta at the very least. Even then I don't see these being viable at all when gang links and bhaalgorns with normal webs get compared to them. If their base range is going to be so short then links and bonuses should apply. The Drake is a Lie
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 55	Posted - 2016.02.12 02:19:51 - [256] - Quote Krevnos wrote: I'm sorry, Fozzie, in their current iteration these modules just aren't cutting muster. I will explain myself below: 1. They do not benefit from gang links which are employed by huge numbers of players. Gang links skew the optimal range of standard webifiers to the right. 2. Ships that boast stasis webifier bonuses do not apply any bonus to these new modules, leaving these modules as orphans. I expect that these modules will become a niche unit, employed in rare ship setups. I am going to strap one to my Mega day they are released.. What are you on about?
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 427	Posted - 2016.02.12 13:23:33 - [257] - Quote My got feeling, while doing pvp, says the optimal range should be 2k Eve online is : A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online D) CCP Games pay More to win at skill training time, now with instant gratification http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 3084	Posted - 2016.02.12 14:25:43 - [258] - Quote I doubt these need extra range. These grapplers are better than webs outside 8-11km. I imagine they will replace the first web on battleships that dont have bonuses. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
May Hoi Valor Evolved Order of Allied Knights 0	Posted - 2016.02.12 16:53:28 - [259] - Quote This is great, but when are we giving Command Ships a buff module like these?
Meditril Minmatar Secret Service Ushra'Khan 380	Posted - 2016.02.12 18:27:34 - [260] - Quote So no Chance any more to survive with a frigate in close orbit below guns of an BS? Bad news for frigate Pilots :-(

Eagles Strike GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 0	Posted - 2016.02.12 18:34:12 - [261] - Quote Personally, I would have gone down a different direction with these. (especially given the name grapple) Since they are only for battleships/capitals I think it would be a lot more interesting if they acted more like tractor beams. So when activated on a target, it would effectively add a velocity component to the target ship that is toward the module. The strength of this should be reduced the further away the target is, and the larger the mass of the target. This should increase diversity in fits, and add game play for small ship pvp (the small ship will have to consider how to escape if they get pulled too close, the large ship will have to consider what circumstances they want to use it, due to tracking) and in larger engagements it might be interesting to see how fleets might employ this to try and pull a target away from their fleet. But that is just my thought.
CowRocket Void Great White North Productions The Blood Covenant 26	Posted - 2016.02.12 21:44:01 - [262] - Quote I was really hoping for it to be fitable on my procurers.. I guess i'll have to keep the small nuet for now. bleeding shadow darkness > did i just saw a red procurer? :P
Lugh Crow-Slave 1557	Posted - 2016.02.13 01:22:44 - [263] - Quote Meditril wrote: So no Chance any more to survive with a frigate in close orbit below guns of an BS? Bad news for frigate Pilots :-( yep but they can only get one of you at a time so looks like you are going to need backup to hold down that BB after you pop and before the rest of the fleet gets there Citadel worm hole tax
Byson1 Panthera. Short Bus Syndicate 43	Posted - 2016.02.13 06:06:02 - [264] - Quote 4k... hahahaahahahahah. 4k hahahahaha Anyone going to actually try to use this? sounds like a waste of fitting space, in my opinion. 4k they will just kite you... close defence- that's what smartbombs are for.
Fascist Jockitch ELUSH Rehab 15	Posted - 2016.02.13 07:38:54 - [265] - Quote Sorry, but this does not make me want to fly battleships. You are putting a short-range tackle module on a very slow ship that can't catch or lock anything. Useless.
Arla Sarain 757	Posted - 2016.02.13 08:43:36 - [266] - Quote Mr Hyde113 wrote: Quote: F -- riends, pilots, capsuleers, lend me your ears! Today we're ready to discuss a new module that we are planning on r -- eleasing in our March patch. I -- 'm excited to see how you creative pilots take advantage of them, esp solo/small gang BS pilots who should g -- et a lot of value from them. The Stasis Grappler module is a new class of web that has high strength, low optimal a -- nd high falloff. It will be the first webifier-type module to use falloff, which will reduce the strength of the web as t -- he range increases. This module can only be fit onto BS and Caps, and just one per ship. It's seperate from e -- xisting Stasis Webs, and doesn't get bonuses from any web-specific bonuses (so no range bonus on Bhaalgorns or s -- trength bonus from Vindicators, and no benefit from gang links). grrrr firgteres
Artenso Vestindal Imperial Laboratories Ltd 14	Posted - 2016.02.13 13:23:45 - [267] - Quote Range and falloff seems too short for BC/capitals. Especially when it doesnt benefit from bonuses to webs. Is there even a BS that fights at those ranges apart of Vindi (and Vindi will utilise its bonuses and use standart webs)? Maybe if you put a set of grappler skills, one for falloff (+10% per level), one for optimal (+20% per level), it will be actually beneficial to BSs.
Baali Tekitsu AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 927	Posted - 2016.02.13 18:12:49 - [268] - Quote I dont see myself using them much since brawling is kinda **** but I guess they are still cool as it will be much easier to stay relatively close (~20k) to battleships that use these instead of a normal web. RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 178	Posted - 2016.02.13 23:26:18 - [269] - Quote I going to humor myself and ask what is odd that Marauder may get 100% range bonus to falloff in place of tractor beam bonus?
Lugh Crow-Slave 1561	Posted - 2016.02.14 14:13:01 - [270] - Quote unidenify wrote: I going to humor myself and ask what is odd that Marauder may get 100% range bonus to falloff in place of tractor beam bonus? Now this would be fun Citadel worm hole tax

Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 80	Posted - 2016.02.14 21:03:01 - [271] - Quote These seem stuck in limbo between two conflicting ideas. 1: provide up close powerful grapple item for heavy tackling. 2: provide projected slow down of distant targets so you can shark them or apply just that extra bit of Dps. Pick one. powerful grapple for heavy tackling? BS's don't do that. Ever. Sharking distant targets as they get slower compared to you? BS's aren't fast enough to catch moss growing. Ever. If you want to give these to a class of ship that needs help as the "special snowflake that makes them see use". Give them to assault frigates. They would love projected slowdown, with ever increasing speed imbalance. ending in an 85% heavy tackle on their 'at 0' target. Enyos would love them. Vengeance's would love them. Hawks would love them. Jaguars would love them. Do that.
FT Cold The Scope Gallente Federation 49	Posted - 2016.02.15 01:00:46 - [272] - Quote Baali Tekitsu wrote: I dont see myself using them much since brawling is kinda **** but I guess they are still cool as it will be much easier to stay relatively close (~20k) to battleships that use these instead of a normal web. Yeah, it is crap, but it sure is fun and it leaves nice red streaks to go with the green on your KB.
Luscius Uta 195	Posted - 2016.02.15 08:25:19 - [273] - Quote I think that Bhaalgorn's bonus to web range should apply to Heavy Stasis Grapplers, since they already have a low optimal range, so it isn't likely to cause balance issues and I don't think those modules will be more popular than regular webs. Of course, it's another thing with Vindicator since 90% webs are already extremely strong. Drifters have arrived - The End is nigh!
Nico Aristaeus The Vendunari End of Life 11	Posted - 2016.02.15 08:55:39 - [274] - Quote Good mod for a bastion Golem. There are two types of people: People that can extrapolate from incomplete data.
FireusI F-I-N-K Industry F-I-N-K and Co. 13	Posted - 2016.02.15 13:30:11 - [275] - Quote I like the sound of this module But i also would like to see the BPO 's costs Items list to work out the cost of building them but as of yet none that i have seen. Would like a update on this regards FriesuI
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 747	Posted - 2016.02.15 14:02:22 - [276] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: These seem stuck in limbo between two conflicting ideas. 1: provide up close powerful grapple item for heavy tackling. 2: provide projected slow down of distant targets so you can shark them or apply just that extra bit of Dps. Pick one. powerful grapple for heavy tackling? BS's don't do that. Ever. Sharking distant targets as they get slower compared to you? BS's aren't fast enough to catch moss growing. Ever. If you want to give these to a class of ship that needs help as the "special snowflake that makes them see use". Give them to assault frigates. They would love projected slowdown, with ever increasing speed imbalance. ending in an 85% heavy tackle on their 'at 0' target. Enyos would love them. Vengeance's would love them. Hawks would love them. Jaguars would love them. Do that. no. We don't need frigates with webs that reach out to 24km. It will just continue to reinforce small kitey ships, and again big ships take another unneeded nerf. Stop trying to introduce gimmicks into small ships that will affect large ship operation. A web that reaches 20-24km and increase strength with range is actually quite good for brawling or even kiting BS. AF just need stats tweaked, or T3D's need another pass with the nerfhammer. Yes BS are slow, but some are still fairly quick all things considered, like the phoon, mach, pest and bhargest. BS also have long range neuts, so combine long range neut with stasis grappler and it might be enough to shutdown tackle long enough to score good hits, or leave. I think you should actually fly the ship before commenting on how useful a module will be for it. As brawling in a BS, especially a missile BS is still quite viable. I'm hoping to see an improvement with torpedo battleships especially with the grappler. Since most people will ram a battleship, they will be slowed by the 60-85% depending on range to the ship. Combined with 2nd web and application mods, torps might be able to hit cruisers and even frigs fairly well in scram range. Current stats show a torp phoon with 2 webs, missile computer and rigor rig + crash to apply around 300 dps to a dual MSE svipul, and perfect application to most cruisers. Grappler will make that better when svipul is hugging me around 1-2km, slowing it even further. So we might be able to get 350-400dps applied with torps on a shield svipul. Before drones, mind you. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 80	Posted - 2016.02.15 15:58:43 - [277] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: no. We don't need frigates with webs that reach out to 24km. Stop trying to introduce gimmicks into small ships that will affect large ship operation. I think you should actually fly the ship before commenting on how useful a module will be for it. These do not reach 24 km. At 22, they only reduce speed by 10%. Negligible if you're trying to catch size smaller ships or trying to hit with low tracking guns. A tracking comp gives you more tracking unscripted that that 10% slowdown would give you. So for either intended use, a different module would perform better. Assault frigates and HACs are the only pirate or T2 ship classes in the game left that do not have a snowflake function. EVERY ship has something that you cannot get on another hull in any remote capacity. Everything has a gimmick. Its how CCP creates artificial floors for their uses. Grid control RHM geddons are one of my favorite ships to fly. I see no use for these on a class of ship that lacks the speed to take advantage of the progressively better slowdown as you close range, and already possesses superb options for shutting down speed inside 10km and hammering 600+ dps onto somethings face. A heavy neut/Scram/Web pretty much already railroads anything out to 12km. I guess i can't wait to be proven wrong. Will look forward to seeing them on the field.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 748	Posted - 2016.02.15 22:23:32 - [278] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: no. We don't need frigates with webs that reach out to 24km. Stop trying to introduce gimmicks into small ships that will affect large ship operation. I think you should actually fly the ship before commenting on how useful a module will be for it. These do not reach 24 km. At 22, they only reduce speed by 10%. Negligible if you're trying to catch size smaller ships or trying to hit with low tracking guns. A tracking comp gives you more tracking unscripted that that 10% slowdown would give you. So for either intended use, a different module would perform better. Assault frigates and HACs are the only pirate or T2 ship classes in the game left that do not have a snowflake function. EVERY ship has something that you cannot get on another hull in any remote capacity. Everything has a gimmick. Its how CCP creates artificial floors for their uses. Grid control RHM geddons are one of my favorite ships to fly. I see no use for these on a class of ship that lacks the speed to take advantage of the progressively better slowdown as you close range, and already possesses superb options for shutting down speed inside 10km and hammering 600+ dps onto somethings face. A heavy neut/Scram/Web pretty much already railroads anything out to 12km. I guess i can't wait to be proven wrong. Will look forward to seeing them on the field. Fit MJD, fit dual web/tackle. Wait for scrams, kill scrams, leave. Idk why people think they NEED to catch things in a BS. Things come to you in a BS. And if you end up fighting a kite gang who don't want to commit, then MJD your way to freedom. Its pretty simple baiting, or calling the kiter's bluff. If they don't want to commit, then i can't die, unless they are really well prepared (tackle in multiple locations in a 100km sphere). 10% isn't much, but as they get closer, they get slower, while they are also under heavy neut pressure. Being able to start slowing them at 22km (i thought it was 24, w/e) is much better than trying to slow them down starting at 13km, when by then, an MWD frig going 4k/s is going to coast through your web/scram and get tackle. Whereas with the grappler there is a little bit more wiggle room to either get transversal or neut them out so they can't apply tackle initially, which then bumps transversal. It will still be tricky for turret kiting BS, but is an improvement for those of us who aren't flying around with a dedicated link alt and have stock in fed navy webs. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 82	Posted - 2016.02.16 21:17:15 - [279] - Quote derp
Kasia en Tilavine School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 82	Posted - 2016.02.16 21:18:57 - [280] - Quote Kasia en Tilavine wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Idk why people think they NEED to catch things in a BS. Things come to you in a BS. And if you end up fighting a kite gang who don't want to commit, then MJD your way to freedom. This is sort of at the core of why i am not super excited about these. They are going to shine in a defensive situations, true. When coupled with a scram, they can shut down fast targets enough to wreck.... Just like webs already do... The issue is that enemies who commit, will commit to scram range already. They would have, and won't turn back when they see the grappler effect. tunnel vision will be the end of them. With or without this becoming a thing. Its nice to see a litte bit of falloff past web range and a fast refresh rate on the slowdown, but will these be all that more powerful than webs? Enough to warrant noticeable grid cost? I'm not seeing it. Maybe if there was no limit to how many could be fit.... Maybe we would be better off just making T2 webs 8+6 optimal and falloff and tossing the whole "grappler" module altogether.

ShadowGod56 Blood Oath Foundation Adaptation. 0	Posted - 2016.02.16 22:13:47 - [281] - Quote This new module looks like a massive joke, and not a very good joke ether basically all i got form this is that anyone considering fitting this should fit Fed Navy Webs and they will be more effective 95% of the time
Cartheron Crust Matari Exodus 188	Posted - 2016.02.16 23:16:13 - [282] - Quote ShadowGod56 wrote: This new module looks like a massive joke, and not a very good joke ether basically all i got form this is that anyone considering fitting this should fit Fed Navy Webs and they will be more effective 95% of the time What if I'm poor and can't afford a 70mil (or whatever they are now) web? :<
Terraj Oknatis xX-Crusader-Xx Tactical Narcotics Team 39	Posted - 2016.02.17 01:15:48 - [283] - Quote I know CCP loves equations and math so I have a good formula to use Idea awesomeness is inversely proportional to number of pages in response.
Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 564	Posted - 2016.02.17 03:39:02 - [284] - Quote 1 of those 2 faction modules better be imperial navy issue. imp navy hasnt gotten anything this go around. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Mad Abbat Talon Swarm 64	Posted - 2016.02.17 04:55:11 - [285] - Quote Cartheron Crust wrote: ShadowGod56 wrote: This new module looks like a massive joke, and not a very good joke ether basically all i got form this is that anyone considering fitting this should fit Fed Navy Webs and they will be more effective 95% of the time What if I'm poor and can't afford a 70mil (or whatever they are now) web? :< stop being poor by buyin plex from CCP ofc.
Baali Tekitsu AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 928	Posted - 2016.02.17 07:20:42 - [286] - Quote Cartheron Crust wrote: ShadowGod56 wrote: This new module looks like a massive joke, and not a very good joke ether basically all i got form this is that anyone considering fitting this should fit Fed Navy Webs and they will be more effective 95% of the time What if I'm poor and can't afford a 70mil (or whatever they are now) web? :< Why are you flying a battleship then RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
Cartheron Crust Matari Exodus 188	Posted - 2016.02.17 16:07:46 - [287] - Quote Baali Tekitsu wrote: Cartheron Crust wrote: ShadowGod56 wrote: This new module looks like a massive joke, and not a very good joke ether basically all i got form this is that anyone considering fitting this should fit Fed Navy Webs and they will be more effective 95% of the time What if I'm poor and can't afford a 70mil (or whatever they are now) web? :< Why are you flying a battleship then Because it's insurable.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2283	Posted - 2016.02.17 17:38:05 - [288] - Quote Cartheron Crust wrote: Baali Tekitsu wrote: Cartheron Crust wrote: ShadowGod56 wrote: This new module looks like a massive joke, and not a very good joke ether basically all i got form this is that anyone considering fitting this should fit Fed Navy Webs and they will be more effective 95% of the time What if I'm poor and can't afford a 70mil (or whatever they are now) web? :< Why are you flying a battleship then Because it's insurable. Then it won't matter if you lose it because you are too cheap to fit it properly. =ƒÿ£ CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Andrew Indy POS Party Ember Sands 151	Posted - 2016.02.18 08:25:10 - [289] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Then it won't matter if you lose it because you are too cheap to fit it properly. =ƒÿ£ So what you are saying is that every BS should be green? Why not just delete T2 BS mods from eve altogether. Also if you are dual Web fit, having a grapple as the second web would be a great idea. Not only can you start webbing earlier but you can slow them down a tonne more.
Arthur Aihaken CODE.d 4989	Posted - 2016.02.18 09:14:47 - [290] - Quote Any update on these? (didn't feel like sifting through 15 pages of responses) I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Mad Abbat Talon Swarm 65	Posted - 2016.02.19 15:18:01 - [291] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Any update on these? (didn't feel like sifting through 15 pages of responses) I guess it still fails to help to apply damage with Heavy Pulse Lazers at any of its optimals. Guess Abaddon still be used as smartbomming ship, instead of actual PVP boat.
ShadowGod56 Blood Oath Foundation Adaptation. 0	Posted - 2016.02.19 19:52:54 - [292] - Quote So I have been brainstorming to try and make this new idea more useful at its intended goal which is to make solo and small gang BS/Cap ships more viable without making them into solo omnipwn mobiles that wipe the field the moment they show up to start lets go over real quick what the problems that BS and caps face atm -Hard applying DPS to smaller targets, (current description helps with this slightly) -**** locking times on anything smaller then a BC/BS -Poor align times/ warp speed (a much more fixable Problem due to Rig/Implant Options) So the current description of the Heavy Grappler is a Single target high strength web with Vindicator lvls of strength at close range that gets weaker the farther away the target gets. Initial problems with this idea are that any small targets that are being piloted with any sort of skill or long range fit wonGÇÖt ever get anywhere close enough to be effected by this new Module and faction webs will be more effective a majority of the time. The other problems are this doesnGÇÖt do anything to increase the lock speed of the BS/Cap to be able to actually engage something smaller then it, and sense itGÇÖs going to take a midslot it will prevent the BS/Cap from fitting more SEBOGÇÖs to achieve a reasonable lock time First off make the optimal something like 3-4 Km that way when overheated it can actually get some reasonable range, second make it an AOE effect, this will prevent it from strait up just making the Serpentis/Vindicator Bonus a useless gimmick. Third give it a bonus to Scan res while active equivalent to 1 Sebo. These changes make it an actual unique Module that will make Solo/Small gang Battleship fleets be able to control the fight against gangs of more traditional Fleet setups Making it an AOE will secure its place as a solo/Small gang Utility mod that will give them some much needed control over a fight if the opponents are set up for close range or if they ** up on their positioning. It also gives the Pilot using the Grappler dynamic choices he needs to think about while using it. for instance fleets having large amounts of these things fit could very well screw over anything in its own gang that needs to maintain high speed to be effective, and other interesting effects Slowing Down incoming bombs or even Enemy/ Friendly Drones Discuss!
Kblackjack54 Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance 130	Posted - 2016.02.20 02:50:00 - [293] - Quote Another utterly useless gob of skull candy from the mind of Fozzie.
Khan Wrenth Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation 449	Posted - 2016.02.20 03:15:14 - [294] - Quote ShadowGod56 wrote: Stuff Actually I don't think AOE is a good idea since that will likely screw over friendly ships in the vicinity, plus make the module unusable in low/highsec where AOE is mostly forbidden (exceptions noted). However, if we made the module a high-slot weapon, so it could compete with neuts in that spare highslot space, we could have an interesting conversation there. Plus, if we're going to combine functions, I'd rather have it combined with a target painter effect equal to the grapple effect and falloff, so that battleships can really start to lay down the hurt on the target. Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
ShadowGod56 Blood Oath Foundation Adaptation. 0	Posted - 2016.02.20 16:23:27 - [295] - Quote Khan Wrenth wrote: ShadowGod56 wrote: Stuff Actually I don't think AOE is a good idea since that will likely screw over friendly ships in the vicinity, plus make the module unusable in low/highsec where AOE is mostly forbidden (exceptions noted). However, if we made the module a high-slot weapon, so it could compete with neuts in that spare highslot space, we could have an interesting conversation there. Plus, if we're going to combine functions, I'd rather have it combined with a target painter effect equal to the grapple effect and falloff, so that battleships can really start to lay down the hurt on the target. im not against it being a highslot, but it not being used in highsec isn't so much a problem imo, it being used in Lowsec i think it would work out sense its not as powerful as a bubble and doesn't do massive burst AOE damage like bombs. but it causing friendly ships to be slowed in it i think makes it a dynamic and interesting option that secures its places as a Solo/Small gang module and requires the pilot to have to think about his choices of activating/overheating to not **** over the quicker members of its fleet if they go out in a more traditional mixed fleet. For solo it works perfectly cause you only have to worry about yourself, but for small gangs that don't care about mobility with maybe like 2-3 people Fat Battleships that don't rely on drones to do a majority of there DPS (Abbadons, Rokhs, Malestroms, Etc) would create some interesting options and tactics
Aivlis Eldelbar Caldari Independent Navy Reserve Curatores Veritatis Alliance 160	Posted - 2016.02.20 23:13:34 - [296] - Quote ShadowGod56 wrote: Khan Wrenth wrote: ShadowGod56 wrote: Stuff Actually I don't think AOE is a good idea since that will likely screw over friendly ships in the vicinity, plus make the module unusable in low/highsec where AOE is mostly forbidden (exceptions noted). However, if we made the module a high-slot weapon, so it could compete with neuts in that spare highslot space, we could have an interesting conversation there. Plus, if we're going to combine functions, I'd rather have it combined with a target painter effect equal to the grapple effect and falloff, so that battleships can really start to lay down the hurt on the target. im not against it being a highslot, but it not being used in highsec isn't so much a problem imo, it being used in Lowsec i think it would work out sense its not as powerful as a bubble and doesn't do massive burst AOE damage like bombs. but it causing friendly ships to be slowed in it i think makes it a dynamic and interesting option that secures its places as a Solo/Small gang module and requires the pilot to have to think about his choices of activating/overheating to not **** over the quicker members of its fleet if they go out in a more traditional mixed fleet. For solo it works perfectly cause you only have to worry about yourself, but for small gangs that don't care about mobility with maybe like 2-3 people in Fat Battleships that don't rely on drones to do a majority of there DPS (Abbadons, Rokhs, Malestroms, Etc) would create some interesting options and tactics It affecting friendlies would immediately give rise to instawarping BS fleets, so let's stay away from that line of thought. I do feel the numbers are kinda low, so a faction web is a better idea than this new mod in most situations. If CCP are already making it BS-only, there would be no harm in giving it some more punch, a longer, shallower, effectiveness curve, or both.
Fourteen Maken Omega Industry Inc. The Ditanian Alliance 264	Posted - 2016.02.22 06:12:42 - [297] - Quote Good change but too weak to make any difference, please make these much stronger and give better range. I think we all want more battleships in pvp, even people who won't necessarily fly them they can be good targets to engage in groups. There's no danger of them becoming oppressive as long as they have slow lock times and relatively poor mobility, the slow lock time means smaller ships really only engage them out of choice anyway.
Mad Abbat Talon Swarm 67	Posted - 2016.02.22 09:50:20 - [298] - Quote why don't just to buff a sigres of large guns and be done with it? No, we gonna add a mod, that you have no midslot to fit, and it will not help in the job regardless., because it has no range.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 2401	Posted - 2016.02.22 11:29:23 - [299] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Yeah you should need a fleet of battleships to solo a frigate. CCP Fozzie GÇ£We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGÇª in null sec anomalies. GÇ£* Kaalrus pwned..... :)
ivona fly Black Fox Marauders 31	Posted - 2016.02.22 17:17:11 - [300] - Quote You know what might have been - Better - a module like a "shield boost amplifier" "Pulsed web stasis amplifier" .. "can only be fit on battleships capitals and command ships" or whatever it takes a truck load of cap while it pulses and the range and strength of a web can be boosted to whatever level works out not to be too oppressive but makes battleships scary for tackle. it will eventually cap you out so using with skill will be very important, this way you can also invest in FED WEBS really skilled tackle can dip in out to play out your cap / cycles just like they do with Rapid Launchers. it will take an extra slot and RIP your cap, but if you need a few seconds to blap a frigate/cruiser and GTFO you enable it, or if your like i'm not making it out of here.... you can hit something shiny for full DPS for a few seconds :) and die a glorious death while stomping that garmur or whatever Having it use alot of cap also means it will be like a 3 slot setup WEB/CAP BOOSTER/AMPLIFIER and will contest cap resource with neuts / local reps. This should help balance it. Possibly a cool down so you can't park a battery feeding augror with it at a gate camp.

Flyinghotpocket Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 568	Posted - 2016.02.23 23:59:42 - [301] - Quote ivona fly wrote: You know what might have been - Better - a module like a "shield boost amplifier" "Pulsed web stasis amplifier" .. "can only be fit on battleships capitals and command ships" or whatever it takes a truck load of cap while it pulses and the range and strength of a web can be boosted to whatever level works out not to be too oppressive but makes battleships scary for tackle. it will eventually cap you out so using with skill will be very important, this way you can also invest in FED WEBS really skilled tackle can dip in out to play out your cap / cycles just like they do with Rapid Launchers. it will take an extra slot and RIP your cap, but if you need a few seconds to blap a frigate/cruiser and GTFO you enable it, or if your like i'm not making it out of here.... you can hit something shiny for full DPS for a few seconds :) and die a glorious death while stomping that garmur or whatever Having it use alot of cap also means it will be like a 3 slot setup WEB/CAP BOOSTER/AMPLIFIER and will contest cap resource with neuts / local reps. This should help balance it. Possibly a cool down so you can't park a battery feeding augror with it at a gate camp. I think this will add to gameplay without being a "jesus module" tackle ship pilots can co-ordinate and say how much more time do you think he can boost his webs etc, just like an ASB. the skill can also come from the BS pilot when in fleets co-ordinating with other large calibre weapon ships to slow something down for the duration of like 1 or two artillery cycles Counter-able with strong or distributed neuting power also, leaving it not too stupid. this guy knows how to get you more money and waste more training on sp. Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
mike thomas Rogue Clones Yulai Federation 0	Posted - 2016.02.29 04:18:22 - [302] - Quote this is going to make a web loki use less loki needs a buff so that we still want to fly it an it will make it to were lite stuff is goin to be vollied of field
Khan Wrenth Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation 485	Posted - 2016.02.29 15:44:27 - [303] - Quote If nothing else, this has now given me the definitive name for my strange Natacha in TF2. Hey, I got a free nametag to burn anyway. Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Rek Seven Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 2157	Posted - 2016.02.29 23:49:44 - [304] - Quote Not good enough. Needs more range and it should be a high slot module. The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Krevnos Back Door Burglars The Otherworld 74	Posted - 2016.03.04 16:16:28 - [305] - Quote Hey CCP Fozzie, I like the concept of the stasis grappler, but feel that it does not well fit the niche for which it was intended. Not receiving bonuses from either ship class or fleet boosts renders it inferior to the webifier in every situation. If applying bonuses is out of the question, I would like to propose greatly increasing requirements for fitting to that of heavy neutralisers and converting it to a high slot module. Best regards, Krev
Pryce Caesar Cloak and Daggers Fidelas Constans 49	Posted - 2016.03.05 17:52:11 - [306] - Quote These appear ideal for short range weapon modules (blasters, autocannons, torpedo, pulse laser) when paired with their tracking speed. Add on Afterburner or MWD to close distance to snag ships with the stasis grappler and warp disruptors, and you could have an inescapable predator. I think that is the concept they are going for - making the close range weapons on battleships and capitals more viable.
Krevnos Back Door Burglars The Otherworld 77	Posted - 2016.03.06 11:09:59 - [307] - Quote Pryce Caesar wrote: These appear ideal for short range weapon modules (blasters, autocannons, torpedo, pulse laser) when paired with their tracking speed. Add on Afterburner or MWD to close distance to snag ships with the stasis grappler and warp disruptors, and you could have an inescapable predator. I think that is the concept they are going for - making the close range weapons on battleships and capitals more viable. Don't kid yourself: if you're in a Megathron as part of a small gang, any group worth its salt will have you webbed down long before you get into range to fully lock down a target with grappler.
Lugh Crow-Slave 1681	Posted - 2016.03.06 19:16:03 - [308] - Quote Flyinghotpocket wrote: ivona fly wrote: You know what might have been - Better - a module like a "shield boost amplifier" "Pulsed web stasis amplifier" .. "can only be fit on battleships capitals and command ships" or whatever it takes a truck load of cap while it pulses and the range and strength of a web can be boosted to whatever level works out not to be too oppressive but makes battleships scary for tackle. it will eventually cap you out so using with skill will be very important, this way you can also invest in FED WEBS really skilled tackle can dip in out to play out your cap / cycles just like they do with Rapid Launchers. it will take an extra slot and RIP your cap, but if you need a few seconds to blap a frigate/cruiser and GTFO you enable it, or if your like i'm not making it out of here.... you can hit something shiny for full DPS for a few seconds :) and die a glorious death while stomping that garmur or whatever Having it use alot of cap also means it will be like a 3 slot setup WEB/CAP BOOSTER/AMPLIFIER and will contest cap resource with neuts / local reps. This should help balance it. Possibly a cool down so you can't park a battery feeding augror with it at a gate camp. I think this will add to gameplay without being a "jesus module" tackle ship pilots can co-ordinate and say how much more time do you think he can boost his webs etc, just like an ASB. the skill can also come from the BS pilot when in fleets co-ordinating with other large calibre weapon ships to slow something down for the duration of like 1 or two artillery cycles Counter-able with strong or distributed neuting power also, leaving it not too stupid. How dies this idea increase sp need this guy knows how to get you more money and waste more training on sp. Citadel worm hole tax
Lugh Crow-Slave 1681	Posted - 2016.03.06 19:17:17 - [309] - Quote Krevnos wrote: Pryce Caesar wrote: These appear ideal for short range weapon modules (blasters, autocannons, torpedo, pulse laser) when paired with their tracking speed. Add on Afterburner or MWD to close distance to snag ships with the stasis grappler and warp disruptors, and you could have an inescapable predator. I think that is the concept they are going for - making the close range weapons on battleships and capitals more viable. Don't kid yourself: if you're in a Megathron as part of a small gang, any group worth its salt will have you webbed down long before you get into range to fully lock down a target with grappler. But they have to get into your Web range to do it Citadel worm hole tax
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 758	Posted - 2016.03.07 13:46:02 - [310] - Quote Im going to assume the grapplers and stasis drones will having stacking penalties? I can maybe see a small niche for web drones+grapplers at point range to slow them down past the 10-20%. So medium web drones+grappler at 20-21km could combine for around 30% velocity loss? Sig bloom plus loss of speed could be a significant application buff for things like cruise missiles or RHML. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Commander Spurty Moosearmy I N F A M O U S 1614	Posted - 2016.03.07 16:07:41 - [311] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Im going to assume the grapplers and stasis drones will having stacking penalties? Wait, what? People actually use stasis drones? There are good ships And wood ships And ships that sail the sea But the best ships are Spaceships Built by CCP
Spurty Moosearmy I N F A M O U S 1614	Posted - 2016.03.07 16:07:41 - [312] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Im going to assume the grapplers and stasis drones will having stacking penalties? Wait, what? People actually use stasis drones? There are good ships And wood ships And ships that sail the sea But the best ships are Spaceships Built by CCP
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 758	Posted - 2016.03.07 17:09:13 - [313] - Quote Commander Spurty wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Im going to assume the grapplers and stasis drones will having stacking penalties? Wait, what? People actually use stasis drones? I dont currently, but having a set in my BS to combine with grapplers falloff to get speed reduction in the 30-40% range sounds like a good reason. Using RHML or cruise missiles could see a significant buff to application if you have a 800m sig mwd cruiser flying at 1.5k/s or less. 1 day left, ill probably give it a try or test on sisi. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 179	Posted - 2016.03.07 19:01:30 - [314] - Quote so I test it on SISI with my Golem 1 TP + Grappler will allow me to oneshot frigate with rage torp. quite improvement in my opinion.
Templar Dane Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica 377	Posted - 2016.03.08 07:54:54 - [315] - Quote unidenify wrote: so I test it on SISI with my Golem 1 TP + Grappler will allow me to oneshot frigate with rage torp. quite improvement in my opinion. Tried with paladin. If you're in bastion you can't hit an afterburning frigate that's inside the optimal of the grappler, even with an additional web. edit Tried with web + grappler + strong drop + dual heavy pulse
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 758	Posted - 2016.03.08 20:25:17 - [316] - Quote Templar Dane wrote: unidenify wrote: so I test it on SISI with my Golem 1 TP + Grappler will allow me to oneshot frigate with rage torp. quite improvement in my opinion. Tried with paladin. If you're in bastion you can't hit an afterburning frigate that's inside the optimal of the grappler, even with an additional web. edit Tried with web + grappler + strong drop + dual heavy pulse Well.. transversal and sig resolution of guns still exist, so yea. A battleship sitting still wont be able to track a frig orbiting, especially an AB frig. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2652	Posted - 2016.03.08 20:34:47 - [317] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Templar Dane wrote: unidenify wrote: so I test it on SISI with my Golem 1 TP + Grappler will allow me to oneshot frigate with rage torp. quite improvement in my opinion. Tried with paladin. If you're in bastion you can't hit an afterburning frigate that's inside the optimal of the grappler, even with an additional web. edit Tried with web + grappler + strong drop + dual heavy pulse Well.. transversal and sig resolution of guns still exist, so yea. A battleship sitting still wont be able to track a frig orbiting, especially an AB frig. Turret BS have the MJD options to deal with that. Killing frigs as they beeline for you in a strait line is not that hard on the tracking requirement.
Sgt Ocker Kenshin. DARKNESS. 841	Posted - 2016.03.08 22:09:31 - [318] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Templar Dane wrote: unidenify wrote: so I test it on SISI with my Golem 1 TP + Grappler will allow me to oneshot frigate with rage torp. quite improvement in my opinion. Tried with paladin. If you're in bastion you can't hit an afterburning frigate that's inside the optimal of the grappler, even with an additional web. edit Tried with web + grappler + strong drop + dual heavy pulse Well.. transversal and sig resolution of guns still exist, so yea. A battleship sitting still wont be able to track a frig orbiting, especially an AB frig. Turret BS have the MJD options to deal with that. Killing frigs as they beeline for you in a strait line is not that hard on the tracking requirement. Turret BS can MJD while scrammed by a frig close orbiting? Killing frigates as they beeline for you, tracking is not an issue, until they get you pointed and are under your guns. Grappler Web on BS = Blaster fit or go home, with the current meta of kitey everything, lots of BS using Grappler web gonna die. This new gimmick web is not going to help a great deal for much of anything, in a BS your still better off using a T2 web, in a capital (dread especially) your far better off having a Hugin or Rapier with you and use that mid slot for something that will actually help you apply damage "before" any attacker gets under your guns. A carrier just use smart bombs, they will be far more effective on anything that is orbiting you at useful Grappler range Only way to really make this thing viable would be to give the ships that can fit it a 200% bonus to optimal range, that way when you overheat it, you have an optimal range that may actually be useful, for something other than a blaster BS (which is simply BS). My opinions are mine. If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
lordlotus Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 3	Posted - 2016.03.09 13:43:09 - [319] - Quote boring.... zzzzzzZZZZ kamakase drones now thats what i want !
lordlotus Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 3	Posted - 2016.03.09 13:54:00 - [320] - Quote lordlotus wrote: boring.... zzzzzzZZZZ kamakazi drones now that's what I want ! Oh and what about a mod that u can fit to chosen ships that can do melee or physical damage, normal safety rules still apply the weapon should be retractable user uses at own risk ^^

Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2652	Posted - 2016.03.09 14:47:03 - [321] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Turret BS can MJD while scrammed by a frig close orbiting? Killing frigates as they beeline for you, tracking is not an issue, until they get you pointed and are under your guns. Grappler Web on BS = Blaster fit or go home, with the current meta of kitey everything, lots of BS using Grappler web gonna die. This new gimmick web is not going to help a great deal for much of anything, in a BS your still better off using a T2 web, in a capital (dread especially) your far better off having a Hugin or Rapier with you and use that mid slot for something that will actually help you apply damage "before" any attacker gets under your guns. A carrier just use smart bombs, they will be far more effective on anything that is orbiting you at useful Grappler range Only way to really make this thing viable would be to give the ships that can fit it a 200% bonus to optimal range, that way when you overheat it, you have an optimal range that may actually be useful, for something other than a blaster BS (which is simply BS). I was coming from a PvE point of view. Of course this is all moot if you ever get a scram on you. AB scram frigs will need to be dealt with with a different tool set but I'm not sure the grappler was designed to counter those anyway.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2993	Posted - 2016.03.09 15:29:52 - [322] - Quote Would allowing grapplers on combat battlecruisers be a bad idea?
Terraj Oknatis xX-Crusader-Xx Tactical Narcotics Team 44	Posted - 2016.03.09 21:49:39 - [323] - Quote I just tried the T2 grappler on the test server with a rapid heavy raven VS a Claw orbiting at 20km with a long point as tackle. The grappler increased the damage to the interceptor from 12 per hit to 18 per hit on missiles. The drones did a little better but a good interceptor should still be able to hold down a battle ship no problem while eliminating drones. In my opinion this moduel is not strong enough to counter a cetpor orbiting at 4k at 20 KM. The myth that the moduel would slightly change the frigs orbit enough to get good hits is false. There was no major disruption in the orbit of the interceptor, and its speed was only slightly decreased. If you wanted to counter ceptors then increase the effective range of heavy nuets so that you could eventually turn off their prop. This web is not working the way everyone thinks it should be working.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2660	Posted - 2016.03.09 21:54:24 - [324] - Quote Terraj Oknatis wrote: The grappler increased the damage to the interceptor from 12 per hit to 18 per hit on missiles. Your missiles did 50% better.
Moac Tor Cyber Core Stain Confederation 456	Posted - 2016.03.09 22:33:19 - [325] - Quote Rowells wrote: Would allowing grapplers on combat battlecruisers be a bad idea? BCs are probably the hull on which these grapplers would really shine. Modulated ECM Effects An Alternative to Skill Trading
Andrew Indy POS Party Ember Sands 154	Posted - 2016.03.10 02:33:04 - [326] - Quote Terraj Oknatis wrote: This web is not working the way everyone thinks it should be working. Well at 20KM you are pretty far into falloff so anyone who understands the falloff mechanic will know that it would be ineffective . That being said I think that it will help a lot for ships that rely upon orbiting at very close range. Things like Assault frigs, short range dessies/cruisers , hell even a Blaster or Auto BC can orbit a BS at 500m and be OK in many cases (No Web or AB fit). PS. Get a heavy neut for those pesky Inties. They either get nueted out or come into range to get a NOS on you and then the Grappler works more.
Admiral Icarus Raidriar Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2016.03.10 13:56:52 - [327] - Quote Can't wait to fit this on my Prophecy. (Guessing it's a Medium Module) Don't explain your philosophy. Embody it.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1264	Posted - 2016.03.10 14:54:30 - [328] - Quote Admiral Icarus Raidriar wrote: Can't wait to fit this on my Prophecy. (Guessing it's a Medium Module) unless its turned into a battleship overnight then no.. T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely. ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
DrysonBennington Eagle's Talon's 270	Posted - 2016.03.10 19:35:26 - [329] - Quote Sakurako Kimino wrote: what slot is this mod? I shouldn't even make the comment.
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17508	Posted - 2016.03.10 21:10:52 - [330] - Quote DrysonBennington wrote: Sakurako Kimino wrote: what slot is this mod? I shouldn't even make the comment. You know you want to.

Poranius Fisc State War Academy Caldari State 29	Posted - 2016.03.10 21:41:19 - [331] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2664	Posted - 2016.03.10 21:56:56 - [332] - Quote Poranius Fisc wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP?
baltec1 Bat Country Pandemic Legion 17509	Posted - 2016.03.10 22:08:52 - [333] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP? Technically the Golem I guess.
Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 1103	Posted - 2016.03.11 12:00:44 - [334] - Quote Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. This reads to me as "I will ignore significant part of proposed solution because I don't like it for subjective reasons (also insert an insult of choice), and then complain that what is left of that solution doesn't work". Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 760	Posted - 2016.03.11 14:24:42 - [335] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP? I mean.. its really not hard to murder frigs in a battleship. You just fit for it. Missile BS are especially good at this. RHML is the obvious choice. But with webs/missile computer even cruise missiles apply decently. Just last night i killed a dual RF MSE svipul with my cruise phoon. Before that i killed a dual rep a-type confessor with cruise missiles. Frigs arent hard to kill. But when you only have a long point and web (or grappler) then complain about not applying, thats your own fault. Same principle when people brick tank drakes. "Drakes/HAMs suck because they dont apply when all i fit is a scram" but have a 100k EHP tank. Fit for frig killing and you can kill them easily as well as everything else except other battleships. And its not like BS are as common as frig/cruiser gangs, so its a fair trade in the current meta. Other turret ships like the pest also work well because they can neut out frigs as they close in, preventing them from scramming. I recently killed a dual prop dram and dual prop mal with my pest because i nuked their cap and then pulled range to pop them. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Poranius Fisc State War Academy Caldari State 29	Posted - 2016.03.15 18:50:45 - [336] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP? 2 accounts. A belicose or any bonused painter ship is going to massively help a BS hit a frigate. in the case of a sniper DOmi, it will insta pop them.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 760	Posted - 2016.03.15 21:18:08 - [337] - Quote Poranius Fisc wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: Grath Telkin wrote: Alysha Saronn wrote: Fozzie, can you do us all a favor here at eve and just leave the pvp and game design/balancing to someone who actually plays the damn game... I mean what the hell are you even thinking? 1km optimal web? are the devs and ccp stoned? What the hell are large turrets going to do to a frigate or dessie at 1km? even if you decide to move your aiding them.. Fall off on a webs is dumb and you should feel dumb.. You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP? 2 accounts. A belicose or any bonused painter ship is going to massively help a BS hit a frigate. in the case of a sniper DOmi, it will insta pop them. to be fair, he did specifically state "ship" in the singular, and then followed-up with solo. A bellicose+domi combo is neither of those things. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Poranius Fisc State War Academy Caldari State 29	Posted - 2016.03.15 21:54:09 - [338] - Quote [quote=Stitch Kaneland to be fair, he did specifically state "ship" in the singular, and then followed-up with solo. A bellicose+domi combo is neither of those things.[/quote] It stated a solo friagte, nothing about you being solo.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 760	Posted - 2016.03.15 22:45:28 - [339] - Quote Poranius Fisc wrote: It stated a solo frigate, nothing about you being solo. Where do people get this whole "honor fight at the sun" thing? No... no it didnt. It stated: Quote: What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP? Maybe the better way to read it would be "what battleship would you use to solo frigates with, that has a bonus to tracking and TP?" This isn't an honor "fight at sun" kind of thing. Its a reading comprehension thing. Solo tends to be pretty specific, as in 1 ship/account fighting. Not, "i have a 15man bomber gang being multiboxed by 1 person, so i'm still solo lulz". I see the whole conversation, and you mentioned: Quote: Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. Which led to the previous statement, because it made it sound like you were talking about a single ship that has a bonus to target painters and tracking. Even the original statement mentions: Quote: You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Implying that the topic is a SOLO battleship killing frigates Disclaimer: I probably put more effort into this response than needed, but i'm bored. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Poranius Fisc State War Academy Caldari State 29	Posted - 2016.03.15 23:48:18 - [340] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: It stated a solo frigate, nothing about you being solo. Where do people get this whole "honor fight at the sun" thing? No... no it didnt. It stated: Quote: What ship do you use to SOLO frigates with a battleship with bonus to both tracking and TP? Maybe the better way to read it would be "what battleship would you use to solo frigates with, that has a bonus to tracking and TP?" This isn't an honor "fight at sun" kind of thing. Its a reading comprehension thing. Solo tends to be pretty specific, as in 1 ship/account fighting. Not, "i have a 15man bomber gang being multiboxed by 1 person, so i'm still solo lulz". I see the whole conversation, and you mentioned: Quote: Bonused painters can make it happen on any of the BS's with bonuses to tracking. Which led to the previous statement, because it made it sound like you were talking about a single ship that has a bonus to target painters and tracking. Even the original statement mentions: Quote: You should feel dumb for thinking that BS should be able to solo frigates. Implying that the topic is a SOLO battleship killing frigates Disclaimer: I probably put more effort into this response than needed, but i'm bored. in that case, the grapler will never work, even on a gheddon (have to check if it even fits with nuets) unless the fool was dumb enough to get that close. than you'd ignore the target painter. 2 accounts running 2 ships is not multi boxing 15 bombers. thats a pretty far right comparison. EIther way, i threw off origional topic involving the new grapplers, which wont help you in a solo situation. Removing the painters and multiboxing 15 bombers, perhaps this might be more useful on BS's holding cap's to stop them from re-entering a POS shield, or something like that. they allready move very slowly so IF you can hold and bump them further out, the speed reduction makes them crawl even more.. 1 would probable be enough with others having a backup as you bump them further out.

Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 59	Posted - 2016.03.16 00:23:51 - [341] - Quote Terraj Oknatis wrote: I just tried the T2 grappler on the test server with a rapid heavy raven VS a Claw orbiting at 20km with a long point as tackle. The grappler increased the damage to the interceptor from 12 per hit to 18 per hit on missiles. The drones did a little better but a good interceptor should still be able to hold down a battle ship no problem while eliminating drones. In my opinion this moduel is not strong enough to counter a cetpor orbiting at 4k at 20 KM. The myth that the moduel would slightly change the frigs orbit enough to get good hits is false. There was no major disruption in the orbit of the interceptor, and its speed was only slightly decreased. If you wanted to counter ceptors then increase the effective range of heavy nuets so that you could eventually turn off their prop. This web is not working the way everyone thinks it should be working. A 50% increase against a Ceptor, something even Cruisers stuggle to deal with effectively.. And your complaining? Jesus, your a hard one to please.
FT Cold FUITA Dead Terrorists 54	Posted - 2016.03.16 07:11:45 - [342] - Quote Poranius Fisc wrote: in that case, the grapler will never work, even on a gheddon (have to check if it even fits with nuets) unless the fool was dumb enough to get that close. than you'd ignore the target painter. One of the biggest upshots of the battleship class now is the MJD, which means that to prevent you from moonwalking out of any fight, someone is going to have to scram you, and when they do, queue the stasis grappler. They're not fools for wanting to scram you, they have to scram you to get a fight.
Yun Kuai Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop 290	Posted - 2016.03.16 13:09:19 - [343] - Quote FT Cold wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: in that case, the grapler will never work, even on a gheddon (have to check if it even fits with nuets) unless the fool was dumb enough to get that close. than you'd ignore the target painter. One of the biggest upshots of the battleship class now is the MJD, which means that to prevent you from moonwalking out of any fight, someone is going to have to scram you, and when they do, queue the stasis grappler. They're not fools for wanting to scram you, they have to scram you to get a fight. While in reality that sounds how it should be and sounds like all is working as intended, but the point is they can still scram you from OH scram range and then coast out of that grappler's 10km+ falloff; read ineffective, web and it does nothing since now the BS is stuck for 3mins waiting for the MJD cooldown to finish. For these webs to truly benefit BS classes, especially given their fitting and cap requirements, these need to be significantly better than the average t2 web at 10km, and then start having falloff and decreased effective go from there. --------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
FT Cold FUITA Dead Terrorists 54	Posted - 2016.03.16 17:31:48 - [344] - Quote Yun Kuai wrote: FT Cold wrote: Poranius Fisc wrote: in that case, the grapler will never work, even on a gheddon (have to check if it even fits with nuets) unless the fool was dumb enough to get that close. than you'd ignore the target painter. One of the biggest upshots of the battleship class now is the MJD, which means that to prevent you from moonwalking out of any fight, someone is going to have to scram you, and when they do, queue the stasis grappler. They're not fools for wanting to scram you, they have to scram you to get a fight. While in reality that sounds how it should be and sounds like all is working as intended, but the point is they can still scram you from OH scram range and then coast out of that grappler's 10km+ falloff; read ineffective, web and it does nothing since now the BS is stuck for 3mins waiting for the MJD cooldown to finish. For these webs to truly benefit BS classes, especially given their fitting and cap requirements, these need to be significantly better than the average t2 web at 10km, and then start having falloff and decreased effective go from there. If they're in scram range then they're in neut optimal. Shut down their scram and warp, or turn on your mwd and murderzone them. Besides, not everything trying to scram you is going to be a ceptor with an overheated republic fleet scram and links or is Chessur and manually piloting in a tight cone under your ship. These weren't made to replace webs, just to be an alternative to them or to be paired with them on dual web setups. Because you can point out an instance where they don't perform well doesn't mean they can't work well at all. Seems to me like they're working as intended.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 764	Posted - 2016.03.16 19:47:53 - [345] - Quote When kiting in a BS (without links) im going to take the grappler over standard web everytime. A standard web with heat is only 13km. Take almost any frigate/inty and 3km of buffer is nothing. Frig will just coast through and scram. At least with the grappler i can start slowing them down at 20km and then OH it around 15km and slow them about the same as a standard web. This doesnt even touch on neuts. Combining neuts and grappler is a good way to pop frigs coming in to scram. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Sgt Ocker Kenshin. DARKNESS. 859	Posted - 2016.03.16 20:21:56 - [346] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: When kiting in a BS (without links) im going to take the grappler over standard web everytime. A standard web with heat is only 13km. Take almost any frigate/inty and 3km of buffer is nothing. Frig will just coast through and scram. At least with the grappler i can start slowing them down at 20km and then OH it around 15km and slow them about the same as a standard web. This doesnt even touch on neuts. Combining neuts and grappler is a good way to pop frigs coming in to scram. And because ceptors always travel alone........... My opinions are mine. If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 764	Posted - 2016.03.16 20:29:12 - [347] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: When kiting in a BS (without links) im going to take a grappler over a standard web everytime. A standard web with heat is only 13km. Take almost any frigate/inty and 3km of buffer is nothing. Frig will just coast through and scram. At least with the grappler i can start slowing them down at 20km and then OH it around 15km and slow them about the same as a standard web. This doesnt even touch on neuts. Combining neuts and grappler is a good way to pop frigs coming in to scram. And because ceptors always travel alone........... Ceptors are the fastest ships in the game. So unless its a ceptor blob (which isnt unheard of), the rest of the ships will be well behind the ceptor. Making it easy to single him out for easy popping. This taking into account youre not warping to gates at 0 and actually being cautious of camps or local spikes. Not much you can do if youre on the receiving end of a gate camp. But if you have a gamg chasing you, warping at 100km from a gate for positioning works much better than landing at zero and trying to outrun frigs/ceptors. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
Beta Maoye 108	Posted - 2016.03.17 18:20:36 - [348] - Quote Optimal range is too low. The size of a battleship is already 1km. Minimum orbit range is about 2-3km. A little bit increase in optimal range to 2km would fit its purpose.
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 67	Posted - 2016.03.17 22:17:00 - [349] - Quote Beta Maoye wrote: Optimal range is too low. The size of a battleship is already 1km. Minimum orbit range is about 2-3km. A little bit increase in optimal range to 2km would fit its purpose. I used this last night in combination with a Single Scram, I held and killed a Pontifex at 5km, and it wasn't moving at all, also locked down a Machariel at 5km but he managed to get on the gate to de-aggressed and jumped. The thing works amazingly, if you have used it you would have noticed, works lovely in duels, and in tournaments too, just watch the Spectre Fleet tournamnet comming up, almost every Battleship will be fitted with one over the standard web, and plus, Battleships don't uses Webs to control range against Frigates and Cruisers, we use them to slow the target down enough to Apply more DPS, not to dictate, you can only dictate in a BS fight against other BS's, but then that is stupid as the shortest range BS guns will hit fine at 10-20km, so that makes the Web a moot point of dictation.
Rapscallion Jones Omnibus Solutions 86	Posted - 2016.04.08 18:03:54 - [350] - Quote Please, oh please, OH PLEASE! Let us fit these to Barge/Exhumer hulls. My Skiffs pilots are hungry for this one!

Luscius Uta Anomalous Existence Low-Class 211	Posted - 2016.04.27 12:42:38 - [351] - Quote Considering that they don't benefit from Web-bonused hulls nor from warfare links, I think it might not be a terrible idea to introduce a rig that increases their strength or range. Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Ace Lapointe Duty. Mighty Wings. 74	Posted - 2016.04.29 00:48:51 - [352] - Quote Luscius Uta wrote: Considering that they don't benefit from Web-bonused hulls nor from warfare links, I think it might not be a terrible idea to introduce a rig that increases their strength or range. CCP! THIS! ALL OF THIS! :D
darkneko Black Cat mining Inc. 8	Posted - 2016.05.23 04:39:46 - [353] - Quote Someone may have asked this. But are they targeted or aoe?
Lugh Crow-Slave 2612	Posted - 2016.05.23 06:34:13 - [354] - Quote darkneko wrote: Someone may have asked this. But are they targeted or aoe? .... targeted.. why not just use one? Citadel worm hole tax


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: [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.