Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13725
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:02:14 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everyone! We're planning a huge set of module tiericide in our March release and this thread will serve as the feedback location for changes to Stasis Webifiers.
Our web changes cover a few areas. Like many old sets of modules, the Meta 4 webs were strictly better than T2, significantly reducing the choice involved when choosing fittings. We are correcting this issue on many module sets as we move through them for Tiericide and webs are no exception.
We are also making a significant pass on faction stasis webifiers. There are a lot of faction web varieties, but there are also three distinct areas where the faction webs can be measured against each other: range, strength and fitting. We have adjusted the faction webs so that none are "strictly" better than any other. We do still know that some stats are going to be more highly prized than others so values will not be even, but that's fine. The important thing is that each faction web variant now has a useful niche.
We are also adding Republic Fleet webs because of course the Republic Fleet should make webs.
We had earlier proposed converting officer webs over to the new Stasis Grappler group, but after listening to your feedback we've decided to do a more traditional tiericide pass on the modules and add the word "Heavy" to their names to hint towards their unusually high fitting costs.
Here's the most recent iteration of the numbers:
We're very interested in your feedback on all these changes. We'll be releasing them to Singularity next week if all goes well, so that you can try these and all the other module changes planned for the March release. Please use this thread for passing along your feedback, and we'll be reading.
Thanks!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13725
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 19:02:27 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Skyler Hawk
The Tuskers The Tuskers Co.
67
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:00:59 -
[3] - Quote
Cool changes on the whole, but...
Quote:We are also making a significant pass on faction stasis webifiers. There are a lot of faction web varieties, but there are also three distinct areas where the faction webs can be measured against each other: range, strength and fitting. We have adjusted the faction webs so that none are "strictly" better than any other. We do still know that some stats are going to be more highly prized than others so values will not be even, but that's fine. The important thing is that each faction web variant now has a useful niche.
Dark Blood webs appear 'strictly' better than Dread Guristas - both are listed as using 16 CPU, using 5 cap/sec, and providing a 55% slowdown, but the Blood web has 14 km range while the DG web only has 13 km range. |
Loki Feiht
Feiht Family Clan
208
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:25:07 -
[4] - Quote
Again, no optimal/falloff's? would have made sense
More NPC - Randomly Generated Modular Content-áthread
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=220858
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13740
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:34:04 -
[5] - Quote
Skyler Hawk wrote:Cool changes on the whole, but... Quote:We are also making a significant pass on faction stasis webifiers. There are a lot of faction web varieties, but there are also three distinct areas where the faction webs can be measured against each other: range, strength and fitting. We have adjusted the faction webs so that none are "strictly" better than any other. We do still know that some stats are going to be more highly prized than others so values will not be even, but that's fine. The important thing is that each faction web variant now has a useful niche. Dark Blood webs appear 'strictly' better than Dread Guristas - both are listed as using 16 CPU, using 5 cap/sec, and providing a 55% slowdown, but the Blood web has 14 km range while the DG web only has 13 km range.
Copy/paste error on my part. It's fixed now.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Helsinki Atruin
Assisted Suicide Services
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:50:55 -
[6] - Quote
domination and republic fleet seem, under powered, with sansha getting +5% magnitude for a mere 9 cpu, and shadow serpentis/fed navy losing only 1km, and 9cpu for +10% effectiveness. if the republic fleet/domination webs are supposed to be the "long range" webs, then sansha is seriously infringing on that territory |
Barrett Fruitcake
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:52:36 -
[7] - Quote
Nice add for the Heavy Webs.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2917
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:53:58 -
[8] - Quote
NVM CANT READ |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13748
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 20:54:37 -
[9] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Non of the faction versions getting up to -60%? Seems kind of weird for T2 to be the absolute strongest. Shadow Serp and Fed Navy are 60%
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Adam Lyon
Incident Command Local Is Primary
15
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:09:23 -
[10] - Quote
Rather than going for round numbers can we make the new versions of the modules similar in fitting to the old versions? Just like the M4 DC having a 3 cpu penalty, regular webs having a penalty of 3-4 cpu is similarly painful. |
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
4956
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:22:37 -
[11] - Quote
Why not give Domination and Republic fleet webs the longest range @16km instead of 15km?
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Anthar Thebess
1452
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:29:01 -
[12] - Quote
Pirate Lp store modules are missing
Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists
Show your support to The Cause!
|
Aleksi Aksan
Nothing on Dscan
2
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:37:07 -
[13] - Quote
As with so much of teiricide I think this is a long needed and really good change. And the addition of Republic Fleet Webs is much overdue, a race that has so many web bonused ships not producing them is silly. But that kinda brings me to my only problem with these changes.
Why are Dark Blood Webs getting shorter ranges? Surely a faction that builds web range bonused ships might produce longer range webs than the Caldari and Gurista's? As someone who has always like the solid sense and synergy that comes with fitting faction mods onto the matching faction ships I'm disappointed to see Dark Blood webs becomes a much lower tier choice for Blood Raiders ships. |
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1459
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 21:53:31 -
[14] - Quote
ty for not changing officer webs to grapplers. All our flag Bhaalgorns appreciate it.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
1202
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 22:32:14 -
[15] - Quote
a web with lower cap usage? yeah that's pretty tiered |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1256
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 23:30:54 -
[16] - Quote
not a fan of webs basically staying status quo here, they need a nerf especially when you consider how strong they are for tracking and tackling for as little as 20 cpu and 1 pg ... i certainly think limiting their range and strength is needed, optimal and falloff would also be good here.
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
|
bigbillthaboss3
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
104
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:03:41 -
[17] - Quote
Where are the deadspace mods? |
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2317
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:11:02 -
[18] - Quote
No Falloff, I am happy.
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.
|
Krevnos
Back Door Burglars The Otherworld
56
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:35:48 -
[19] - Quote
Hey Fozzie! Just want to say that I am happy with these changes.
+1 |
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance Team Amarrica
555
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 00:42:28 -
[20] - Quote
soooooooooooooo the dark blood is getting shittier in both velocity and optimal? and is now worse than t2 web entirely? are you stoned?
guess we will still be stuck buying fed navy webs only.
Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
|
|
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team
114
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:31:55 -
[21] - Quote
I like the changes and the addition of missing faction webs. I know its not terricide but something that has bugged me about how webs on frigs effect ships up to capitals the same. I like the new grapple webs that are being introduced but here is an idea I have on how to make these scale better with ship sizes.
So I was thinking about webs and how they currently apply the same effect from the top down. So a Frig can web a carrier for the same amount as it could a frig. That doesnGÇÖt seem right to me. So I thought how would I change it that is easy to understand and scale across the ship sizes to effectively provide a more realistic progression. My thought was to use a scale of 0-5 as the challenge so if n=n then full web effects apply and also if n=n-1 full bonuses still apply but if n=n+1 then only 50% of the web strength would apply. So with that theory if a frig webbed a cruiser with a t2 web its speed would be reduced by 30% not the 60% currently but if a battle ships webbed a frigate it would only be able to apply the full 60% it would not get bonuses because it is 2 ship sizes larger than the fig. I also think this a better way to implement web immunity on supers as the diminishing returns effect scales well but allows titans to web other titans and apply full web effects. It would also allow ships to have a potentially higher point level then their class for example an assault frigate would have a base of 1 not 0 so when a frig webbed an assault frig it would only receive 30% reduction in speed instead of the full amount. This would be the same for HACS. I think it would also work to give ships with a web bonus a +1 to their strength also so the hyena, rapier, vindicator etc. would be able to effect ships 1 class above the normal progression. So a Vindi could web a Capital ship for full webs as it would be Vindi=2 +1 for being a web bonused ship vs a carrier=3 so then the formula would be 2+1=3 and it would apply full webs but if it tried to web a super carrier it would only be able to apply 50% of its web strength. This is how I see the base hull classes 0) frigs, shuttles, pods, destroyers 1)cruisers, industrial transports, mining barges, battlecruisers, 2)battle ships, orca 3)carriers, freighters, dreadnaughts, faxs 4) supercarriers 5) titans
|
Burton UnIncSR
Applied Anarchy ChaosTheory.
7
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 01:39:56 -
[22] - Quote
I really don't see the need to play with the webs and not really sure i like the idea of the shadow serp being brought up to the same level as the Fed Navy. the Fed Navy and The true Sansha both had their special quality's and now there will be options to replace both with different webs |
Alexis Nightwish
406
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:47:49 -
[23] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:We had earlier proposed converting officer webs over to the new Stasis Grappler group, but after listening to your feedback we've decided to do a more traditional tiericide pass on the modules and add the word "Heavy" to their names to hint towards their unusually high fitting costs. That's rare. Let me jot this down in my Notebook of Times the Devs Listened.
*blows off a cm of dust* *cough* *cough* *cough* *cough* Oh my last entry is when you didn't add rig slots to freighters, but went with low slots instead! Nostalgic!
Feedback part: Webs aren't something that needed to be tiericided. I cannot tell you how many times I've had a fit where I needed just one more CPU so I swapped from a Fleeting to an X5. Now all choice will be removed. I will simply use the ****** new Fleeting on every ship with a web because the T2 costs too much CPU for too little gain.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
Aaril
Noble Sentiments Second Empire.
23
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 02:58:57 -
[24] - Quote
I hope that the Fleeting type will have a greatly increased drop rate. With the across the board CPU nerf that occurred today, Fleeting type webs will be in high demand.
Edit: Also, 57.5% has been the standard percentage for YEARS now. Please change the meta items to 57.5%. Just to match what they are today. |
Mad Abbat
Talon Swarm
51
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 08:13:17 -
[25] - Quote
Enduring? really? for 0,3 cap/sec at the cost of 5 cpu? Fozzie, you can do better than this.
There is no choice.
if you can fit a t2 -> go for t2. usually, you can't fit a t2, so you are forced to go for compact, and save 5 cpu to use on smt more usefull than 0,3 cap/sec.
at least make enduring OH like a boss, and a be heatsink in med rack or something. |
Bad Messenger
Rehabilitation Clinic
865
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 14:55:13 -
[26] - Quote
and how is this change anyhow new player friendly?
now only option for low skill players is to use faction web to get 60% web.
oh! i understand you want to sell skillpoints for new players. |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1258
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 15:02:05 -
[27] - Quote
shouldn't T2 webs require level 5 skill?.... as all T2 ships/mods should .. such inconsistency ..
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
|
Fourteen Maken
Omega Industry Inc. The Ditanian Alliance
256
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 16:47:27 -
[28] - Quote
Any consideration given to the balance of LP stores here? Because it doesn't look like it. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2909
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 18:30:05 -
[29] - Quote
No scoped web? Come on.
Scoped Web: 11km optimal -50% speed
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Irya Boone
Never Surrender.
472
|
Posted - 2016.02.12 21:44:45 -
[30] - Quote
the federation is pleased.
CCP it's time to remove Off Grid Boost and Put Them on Killmail too, add Logi on killmails
.... Open that damn door !!
you shall all bow and pray BoB
|
|
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1465
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 16:29:20 -
[31] - Quote
Would you post the cap use per second?
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2909
|
Posted - 2016.02.13 23:42:07 -
[32] - Quote
Tyranis Marcus wrote:Would you post the cap use per second? Going down the list:
1 0.4 1 1.2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 3 3 3
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
100
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 05:49:47 -
[33] - Quote
at least one of the 3 faction webs that are the same should have lower cap requirement in exchange for cpu or range
Quote CCP Fozzie:
... The days of balance and forget are over.
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
5684
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 06:42:19 -
[34] - Quote
This proposal fundamentally underestimates how important the web strength stat is.
The faction webs that wind up at 55% may as well be deleted from the game, they are that much weaker than the tech 2 web.
On an unbonused hull, it's the difference between 40% speed and 45% (single web), or, if my in-head maths on stacking penalties is right, 18% of base speed (dual 60% web) and 22.5% base speed (dual 25% web).
For turrets, that's a big difference in how hard a one-size-smaller ship is to hit.
I strongly feel that 55% bonuses on faction webs should be increased to at least 58%.
As another point, if the Vindicator bonus didn't exist or had slightly lower numbers (such as 8% per level or 8.5% per level) or was calculated differently (applying a 15% per level modifier to ship speed on ships hit by a web that stacked multiplicatively with webs), you could produce deadspace 62% webs and officer 64% webs.
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".
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2910
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 07:59:11 -
[35] - Quote
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:This proposal fundamentally underestimates how important the web strength stat is.
The faction webs that wind up at 55% may as well be deleted from the game, they are that much weaker than the tech 2 web./quote] It is a big deal but it's not always important. Sometimes range is much more important.
There are a lot of clearly superior or clearly inferior faction webs, as some (like Federation Navy and Domination) have both high strength and high range, while others have both low strength and low range. Since there are so many faction web iterations, it would be nice to add more variability to them all, as well as price adjustments. Would be neat to have weaker faction webs that were more affordable.
[quote=Sabriz Adoudel]As another point, if the Vindicator bonus didn't exist or had slightly lower numbers (such as 8% per level or 8.5% per level) or was calculated differently (applying a 15% per level modifier to ship speed on ships hit by a web that stacked multiplicatively with webs), you could produce deadspace 62% webs and officer 64% webs. Alternatively the calculation could be changed so that higher ship skill values get a diminishing return, but an important point about this is that the web strength bonus is too strong--it gets 90% speed reduction with a single T2 web. There should be deadspace webs with a higher speed reduction value that the Serpentis ships must use to achieve these very high speed reduction amounts.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1467
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 10:34:46 -
[36] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Tyranis Marcus wrote:Would you post the cap use per second? Going down the list: 1 0.4 1 1.2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3
Hmm. Thanks. I assume you were able to see the whole table? The image didn't show up as a link for me, so I was stuck with only the first columns, couldn't see cycle times.
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2910
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 11:01:10 -
[37] - Quote
Tyranis Marcus wrote:Hmm. Thanks. I assume you were able to see the whole table? The image didn't show up as a link for me, so I was stuck with only the first columns, couldn't see cycle times. You can see the whole table by right-clicking it and selecting 'View Image', but the table doesn't have a cycle time column anyway. It doesn't really need one, as all webifiers have (and will continue to have) a 5s cycle time, including the officer webs.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13893
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 16:28:21 -
[38] - Quote
Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback so far!
We've made one adjustment to the plan so far, moving the Dark Blood tackle modules into the same stats group as True Sansha. This will generally mean an increase in fitting costs and an increase in range. As you guys pointed out, this better matches the Blood Raider faction traits.
I also want to assure you that the drop rates for these modules will be changing in the same fashion as the other tiericided modules. The new named variations of modules will all have equal drop rates and their combined drop rates will equal the combined drop rates of all the old named modules.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Circumstantial Evidence
258
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 21:36:04 -
[39] - Quote
Will anyone fit the "enduring" variant? Cap drain seems... low, on all of these ;) |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1260
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 21:42:23 -
[40] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Will anyone fit the "enduring" variant? Cap drain seems... low, on all of these ;)
probably not besides noobs .. maybe cap usage should be increased at least on the T2 version, also think T2 should require level5 skill as all T2 mods/ships should require, but its not applied consistently for some reason, i still think webs need a blanket nerf, 15km on faction is OP
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
|
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
5689
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 22:59:58 -
[41] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Will anyone fit the "enduring" variant? Cap drain seems... low, on all of these ;)
Super budget options are useful. If they wind up at 5000 ISK, RvB and similar entities will use them.
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".
|
Gerad Aihaken
Keepers of Balance Legion of xXDEATHXx
11
|
Posted - 2016.02.14 23:38:34 -
[42] - Quote
I think equalizing the range of tech 2 and meta actually nerfs t2 quite badly. Just by looking at it, I can't find any reasons, why would I put something except Compact or Enduring meta into my fitting? 5% speed reduction difference? Pfew, not that significant.
Range difference of overheated meta and T2 -- this is what makes it different now and makes you find additional CPU for fitting and additional ~1m isk for it.
Sorry if that was mentioned before, don't have time to look through the entire thread. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2910
|
Posted - 2016.02.15 00:47:51 -
[43] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:Will anyone fit the "enduring" variant? Cap drain seems... low, on all of these ;) If you have the CPU to spare and you have no use for it elsewhere, the Enduring is better than the Compact. People will use it for that reason, but 0.6 Gj/s isn't a bad thing to have, especially from changing just one module.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Cearain
Plus 10 NV Cede Nullis
1452
|
Posted - 2016.02.15 12:38:45 -
[44] - Quote
At the beginning of tier iced you said that no module in the same meta would be worse at the basic function of the module. Here we see meta 8 modules that have both less range and less web strength then other meta 8 mods all for some gain in cpu.
I think this makes some of the mods clearly inferior as people can rearrange their rapier fits to save 15 cpu without much effort. But I am wondering if original principal is going to be a abandoned in future modules as well. So for example will imperial navy armor mods still give better resists and the federation ones just be easier to fit.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1467
|
Posted - 2016.02.17 02:59:33 -
[45] - Quote
x
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1467
|
Posted - 2016.02.17 03:08:49 -
[46] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Tyranis Marcus wrote:Hmm. Thanks. I assume you were able to see the whole table? The image didn't show up as a link for me, so I was stuck with only the first columns, couldn't see cycle times. You can see the whole table by right-clicking it and selecting 'View Image', but the table doesn't have a cycle time column anyway. It doesn't really need one, as all webifiers have (and will continue to have) a 5s cycle time, including the officer webs.
Yeah, I wasn't even able to do that, and wasn't going to make any assumptions on cycle times in that case. (Been having some interesting computer and internet problems. You should see the juggle I'm doing to log on to Eve right now, until my connection gets sorted out!)
Thanks for the repies, anyway.
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
ISD Atomic Dove
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
85
|
Posted - 2016.02.17 10:41:30 -
[47] - Quote
I've trimmed back a few empty posts, no biggies here.
ISD Atomic Dove
Lieutenant
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
4985
|
Posted - 2016.02.17 16:41:27 -
[48] - Quote
I'm just wondering if there's the potential for adding Deadspace variants of all these modules (not just stasis webs). Since there's already a finite gap between most Faction and Officer versions, I might instead suggest providing similar overall stats to Faction modules but adjust the parameters so you maybe get a 40% web @20km as one option or 45% @18km with another. It would be nice to have options other than simply more strength and range. And with the various Deadspace sub-types it would be easy to accomodate lighter fighting requirements and capacitor usage.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
|
Jimy F
Aliastra Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2016.02.17 21:55:40 -
[49] - Quote
i guess it should look like this ^_^ km / % / cpu 13 60 16 caldari 13 60 16 guristas 14 60 25 federation 14 60 25 serpentist 14 55 16 sansha 15 55 25 khanid (armor tank so hi cpu, apolagize thats not saha but saha is shield tank so shoud have les cpu and not have any comon with webs, armag is khanid wich is balgorn hull, and there is place with 14km web where it fits nice becouse cpu) 15 55 25 dark blood 15 50 16 domination 15 50 16 repiblic |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2921
|
Posted - 2016.02.18 03:21:04 -
[50] - Quote
Is there no one else who wants to have a scoped meta stasis webifier put into the game?
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
|
BobDoLe Senator
Fuxi Legion Fraternity.
1
|
Posted - 2016.02.20 08:08:02 -
[51] - Quote
Is this an intentional (and huge) nerf to Daredevil (and Vigilant/Vindicator but their cpu are not as tight)?
While in current version I fit two meta-4 webs to achieve the 98% speed reduction, after the patch I'll have to replace them with two T2 webs if I want the same effect. The replacement will cost 16 more cpu (22->30), which matters a lot.
It should be noted that although a -60% web is marginally more effective than a -55% web, for a daredevil the -60% web is nearly twice as effective as the -55% one (-90% compared to -82.5%). |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2925
|
Posted - 2016.02.20 10:49:02 -
[52] - Quote
BobDoLe Senator wrote:It should be noted that although a -60% web is marginally more effective than a -55% web, for a daredevil the -60% web is nearly twice as effective as the -55% one (-90% compared to -82.5%). It should be nerfed even further. Serpentis ships should get no more than 75% slowing from a T2 web.
edit: Daredevil can still use Khanid web
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
BobDoLe Senator
Fuxi Legion Fraternity.
1
|
Posted - 2016.02.20 11:22:56 -
[53] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:BobDoLe Senator wrote:It should be noted that although a -60% web is marginally more effective than a -55% web, for a daredevil the -60% web is nearly twice as effective as the -55% one (-90% compared to -82.5%). It should be nerfed even further. Serpentis ships should get no more than 75% slowing from a T2 web. edit: Daredevil can still use Khanid web
Well, you can test the idea by fitting a meta 0 web (or even a -55% web) in daredevil right now, and try to prove me that the fit is anything but useless. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2926
|
Posted - 2016.02.20 17:49:51 -
[54] - Quote
BobDoLe Senator wrote:Well, you can test the idea by fitting a meta 0 web (or even a -55% web) in daredevil right now, and try to prove me that the fit is anything but useless. I'm not sure what you consider bare minimum for operational capacity of a Daredevil, but if I wanted to fly a 60 mil tackler frigate, Daredevil would probably be my first choice. I might go for a Dramiel, though, because that extra speed would be nice and I don't need that web strength.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
1245
|
Posted - 2016.03.07 08:52:54 -
[55] - Quote
Having just done a comparison on this, wouldn't it make more sense for the t1 web to have the same 55% effectiveness?
Reasoning.
t1 has the same fitting costs as the x5 and the same cap consumption as fleeting. If we establish that t1 is the baseline module, then it should be the middle ground as opposed to the bottom of the rung.
If the tiericide isn't built in a manner in which t1 is competitive, then why even bother having t1 as it will never be chosen. This is on the premise that cost of the module is a non-factor, and seeing as how the price variation between these modules is at most 2 million isk, I would consider it a non-factor. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2928
|
Posted - 2016.03.08 15:05:40 -
[56] - Quote
Joe Risalo wrote:If the tiericide isn't built in a manner in which t1 is competitive, then why even bother having t1 as it will never be chosen. This is on the premise that cost of the module is a non-factor, and seeing as how the price variation between these modules is at most 2 million isk, I would consider it a non-factor. Price is always a factor, and for many players 2 million ISK is way too much for a meta stasis webifier. I consider myself in that crowd most of the time but it depends on the hull I'm putting it on. But the meta won't be 2 million for long--it was only up there due to its high popularity back when it was better than t2.
Meta 0 won't get chosen because meta 1 is never too expensive. Even for brand new pilots, 50k ISK is easy to come by and that's usually the upper end of what you have to pay if you have access to a trade hub.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
GinBar
BALKAN EXPRESS Shadow Cartel
7
|
Posted - 2016.03.11 20:46:37 -
[57] - Quote
Devs someone made mistake ? with pricing RF web in LP stores, what is going on ? 80K LP for single RF web, while FN web bpc ( 5 run ) = 60 K LP. Am I crazy or what ? ). And there is no RF web 5 run bpc in LP stores? |
Cartheron Crust
Matari Exodus
189
|
Posted - 2016.03.15 19:00:47 -
[58] - Quote
GinBar wrote:Devs someone made mistake ? with pricing RF web in LP stores, what is going on ? 80K LP for single RF web, while FN web bpc ( 5 run ) = 60 K LP. Am I crazy or what ? ). And there is no RF web 5 run bpc in LP stores?
I don't know if it has changed recently but I used to run missions for the gallente corp that offered the 5 run bpc for fed navy webs. At the time the higher level agents only had the ones that offered courier missions and very very occaisonally a security mission. So they still had low average LP payouts. They were around Stacmon and the lowsec area there iirc. So it still took a long ass time to get that LP. Comparatively not really that much better than other L4 agents. Unless you ran the lowsec ones with a Blockade Runner. Still not that great though.
And do all LP stores have to have the same offers? =/ |
Cearain
Plus 10 NV Cede Nullis
1459
|
Posted - 2016.03.16 15:33:41 -
[59] - Quote
GinBar wrote:Devs someone made mistake ? with pricing RF web in LP stores, what is going on ? 80K LP for single RF web, while FN web bpc ( 5 run ) = 60 K LP. Am I crazy or what ? ). And there is no RF web 5 run bpc in LP stores?
I am not saying this is balanced or not, but you also have to consider the amount of isk and cost of tags involved.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
CaesarGREG
CBC Interstellar Fidelas Constans
14
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 00:22:51 -
[60] - Quote
Statis Webifer T2 didnt had 12km? now 10km? or i remember somthing wrong |
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2954
|
Posted - 2016.05.13 01:04:14 -
[61] - Quote
CaesarGREG wrote:Statis Webifer T2 didnt had 12km? now 10km? or i remember somthing wrong All the T1/meta/T2 have always had 10km range exactly. Only faction variants and higher ever had more.
They had a chance to change this. I was hoping they would add a scoped meta variant, but they decided instead to make me sad.
FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."
Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |