EVE Search - Rigs: Ship Fitting Versatility

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Rigs: Ship Fitting Versatility

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.12 04:20:00 - [1] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 12/06/2007 04:19:33 It's probably been suggested before, but the search didn't return anything useful... Fittings rigs: We currently have rigs to increase the power grid of a ship, and I can only surmise there's a very good reason we don't have rigs to increase a ship's CPU allotment... although it eludes me at present. My proposition however is the addition of a rig that allows you to alter the hi-slot allotment on a given ship. For example: Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of CPU use Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power use. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slot Drawback: -10% My reasoning is simple: When I first heard about rigs, I was rather excited - I assumed (incorrectly) that it would allow us much greater flexibility in fitting ships, but instead it's simply given us "OMGWTFBBQPWN" damage setups, unbreakable tanks and oodles of cap. The above would allow us to choose what we want to do with a specific ship's hull, rather than being forced into specific ships time and time again. For those of you who aren't as strange as I and who don't want to fly a fully missile fitted Vengence, what about squeezing that extra turret onto a Megathron? Giving the Cerberus a full rack of HAMs? Turning the Vagabond into a missile boat from hell? How about a proper Battle Badger, witha pair of Assault Missile launchers? (My figures may not be perfect - please only criticise them if you have another suggestion. I chose CPU as the penalty for turrets and PG for launchers because in my own fitting experience, this is where I struggle most. Otherwise, flame at will) -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Avalon Ranger	Posted - 2007.06.12 04:32:00 - [2] A really nice idea but seems a little too much, I love the idea of adding extra slots but doing it in rig form may cause problems. For the Rig idea I'd give it a 3/5 but for general concept a good 4.5/5 Make it so only 1 of these 4 rigs can be fit to a ship at any one time. This way you won't end up with Apocs with 6 missile slots ect.. Nice idea but doesn't work with rigs very well.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.12 04:47:00 - [3] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 12/06/2007 04:48:40 Quote: Make it so only 1 of these 4 rigs can be fit to a ship at any one time. This way you won't end up with Apocs with 6 missile slots ect.. I haven't looked through every single ship yet, but random testing shows that ships have a calibration capacity of 400. I have set them at 200 and 300 for tech one and two respectively, meaning that the best possible configuration would be the addition of two turret/launcher slots using the tech two rig. In the example of the Apocalypse that you gave, this would mean a total of 4 maximum launcher slots, with 100 calibration left. -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Letheeth Kayl Amarr Chosen Path FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.12 07:23:00 - [4] I always thought you could erase the older edits . . . But I love you, er, your idea I mean. A geddon with 8 lasers, a manticore with 4 launcher slots For that matter, all the amarr ships with utility slots would instantly have another gun on them, and caldari ships would start sporting more missles. This would definetly make combat faster and deadlier again (since the 25% health boost that nerfed the fun ships::shakes fist at CCP::). I like. (PS, this is the answer to fixing stealth bombers . . . more missle slots!) Put down the mirror and return to live With pain With sin With despair Live with penance in God's glory Lesson of Tobias and the Mirror Scriptures Verses26-29
Dogfighter Gallente ORUS Corporate United Corporations of Eve	Posted - 2007.06.12 19:31:00 - [5] Originally by: Avalon Ranger A really nice idea but seems a little too much, I love the idea of adding extra slots but doing it in rig form may cause problems. For the Rig idea I'd give it a 3/5 but for general concept a good 4.5/5 Make it so only 1 of these 4 rigs can be fit to a ship at any one time. This way you won't end up with Apocs with 6 missile slots ect.. Nice idea but doesn't work with rigs very well. Ship modification was not achieved with rigs. They do not really modify a ship, they just boost some attributes. I think the real modification idea is good. And why not to create a Apoc with more missile lauchers? I don't see any problem. But once modified, one should not be able to remove the ship modification once installed. CCP must also think in a way for people to sell such modified ships, and the buyers should be sure they are not buying their modified ships from market scammers. Dogfighter, UCE Diplomat.
Sanctus Maleficus Oberon Incorporated Oberon Imperial Governance	Posted - 2007.06.12 20:54:00 - [6] I think this would be too powerful... you would be increasing firepower by 25-33% on some ships! However, I have a modification to your idea. What about a rig that lets you turn a launcher slot INTO a turret slot, or vice versa. This could have unseen consequences though, especially with ships like the Sacrilege or Damnation... they'd be some serious beasts.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.12 21:20:00 - [7] Quote: What about a rig that lets you turn a launcher slot INTO a turret slot, or vice versa. I thought about this, but decided against it - however, these are the numbers I came up with: Augmented Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of launcher fitting. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -1 launcher slot Augmented Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of luncher fitting. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -2 launcher slots Augmented Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of turret fitting. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -1 turret slot Augmented Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of turret fitting. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 launcher slots Drawback: -2 turret slots The reason I decided against this was simple: it doesn't fit in with the drawback system, whereby the penalty is reduced depending on your rigging skills. As such, I feel should such an idea come to fruition, the original post is the only one that could successfully function in-line with other available rigs. -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Tarron Sarek Gallente Cadien Cybernetics	Posted - 2007.06.13 02:00:00 - [8] I think it would break balance in some/many cases, as most ship designs were made with their current highslot layout in mind. Tempest with 8 turret hardpoints? Uhm.. _________________________________ - Balance is power, guard it well.. -
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.13 04:14:00 - [9] Quote: Tempest with 8 turret hardpoints? Uhm.. Yes - not to mention a Scorpion, Raven and Typhoon with 6 turrets, and a Megathron and Armageddon with 8. The balance is unaffected simply because all ships are equally capable of using such rigs, so no single race/ship is penalised through their addition. -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Lance Fighter	Posted - 2007.06.13 04:20:00 - [10] hmm I was thinking along the lines of a Malediction being able to use missiles effectively. Not that that is a bad thing. As a matter of fact, it sounds nice.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.13 05:29:00 - [11] Quote: I was thinking along the lines of a Malediction being able to use missiles effectively. Not that that is a bad thing. As a matter of fact, it sounds nice. Absolutely! Think of it like this: If a Caldari pilot wanted to fly Amarr ships, he's not going to use lasers, is he? Likewise, a Gallente flying Caldari wouldn't want to use missiles - he's want to fit as many rails as possible. -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.14 02:41:00 - [12] Could a forum moderator please rename this thread to something more appropriate, such as "Hardpoint rigs"? -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Neuromandis Novastorm Inc Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:18:00 - [13] Edited by: Neuromandis on 14/06/2007 15:18:43 This sounds nice, but I hate to break it to you, IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN. Why? Because turrets need hardpoints to be visible to the ship's model. I.e. you need to abuse the graphic artists to put as many turret hardpoints as high slots on all ships, which will not happen anytime soon(imagine that it's about a year that the ferox's 6th turret has not been added for that exact reason). It's not just a matter of the balancing team/devs fooling around with a few numbers and - voila! It needs actual work. That said, I cannot say the idea sounds half bad.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.15 04:05:00 - [14] To be honest, I'd happily not see my turrets at all. Sure it's nice, but gameplay > graphics no matter which way you look at it, and giving pilos more versatility in their fitting choice is surely more important than getting the eye candy right? That said, you're right: it's not going to happen any time soon. I do see it as the next logical step for rigging though... -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Galdaron xax Gallente Cloak and Daggers	Posted - 2007.06.15 13:15:00 - [15] how about interchanging slots ?? a low slot for a med slot a high slot for a med slot or a low slot. and so on.I know most will take high slots or low slots depending the ship.A hauler with 7 low slots anybody ?? just an idea but this would also mean ppl will losse the idea of combat abiliets of ships and are no longer able to predict battle actions.It would make a ship scanner very valuable at that point :)
Eleana Tomelac Gallente	Posted - 2007.06.15 13:37:00 - [16] The drawbacks seems inverted, missile ships often don't care about pwg and some gunships (not talking about the blaster setups that eats loads of CPU) don't care about CPU (I think my hurricane has 25% free). So, if the turret points has pwg drawback and the missile points have cpu drawback, it will make people thing more before using one. It will not be the type of rig you can fit to any ship! Still, a tempest with more turrets would be extremely deadly considering the twin bonus on guns. This would mostly boost the half turret/half missile setups, allowing pilots to forget about missile or turret skills (saving the minmatar ships skill cost). The models are notmade for that, so, yes it is a problem, but... Look the NPCs, ever looked at an officer's megathron? it sounds like 11 turrets for some and the model is clean, no turret misplaced, it just looks like a really powerful gunboat! And missiles are not a problem because we don't see hardpoints. -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast ! Happy owner of a Vexor Navy Issue and few ishkurs. The Vexor Navy Issue is much more fun than the Myrmidon !
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH	Posted - 2007.06.15 14:36:00 - [17] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 15/06/2007 14:39:13 Quote: how about interchanging slots ?? a low slot for a med slot I can't agree with this I'm afraid. A rig that sacrifices high slots for either mid or low slots yes, but I think converting mids to lows and vice versa would create many, many balance issues - and that's ignoring the fact that the UI can only cope with a maximum of eight slots on any one position. I think it would require a lot more work than could be considered reasonable. Converting a high slot to either a low or a mid however seems quite reasonable (UI changes aside) - for example: Linear Power Transformer I This ship modification is designed to increase the low slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 Low slot Drawback: -1 High Slot Linear Power Transformer II This ship modification is designed to increase the low slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 Low slots Drawback: -2 High Slots Switched Mode Power Regulator I This ship modification is designed to increase the mid slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 Mid slot Drawback: -1 High Slot Switched Mode Power Regulator II This ship modification is designed to increase the mid slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration: 300 Bonus: +2 Mid slots Drawback: -2 High slots As I said, I'm not keen on the idea, but there's my take on it nonetheless. Quote: The drawbacks seems inverted, missile ships often don't care about pwg and some gunships (not talking about the blaster setups that eats loads of CPU) don't care about CPU (I think my hurricane has 25% free) I have updated my posts to reflect this. I'm not too concerned about which penalty there is - it should be whichever makes the use of these rigs most difficult. The last thing we'd want is to make such a rigged ship too easy to fit: I see these being usable only with power/cpu rigs - the latter of which does not exist, but probably should... Quote: Still, a tempest with more turrets would be extremely deadly considering the twin bonus on guns. This would mostly boost the half turret/half missile setups, allowing pilots to forget about missile or turret skills (saving the minmatar ships skill cost). It would be a nice boost for the Tempest, but more than what can be achieved with current rigs? I'm dubious... with damage mods and rigs, I think a similar sniper setup could be achieved without this rig. If you did fit this, you'd struggle to get those damage rigs fitted - not to mention you'd be VERY tight for power/CPU and would struggle to fit anything else. As a former Caldari pilot, I was predominantly thinking about such unpopular split setup ships as the Moa and Scorpion, but it's equally applicable to the Khanid ships and of course any split setup ships. It also allows for more variation with sniper settings, allowing other races to concentrate on their range to keep up with, for example the Rokh's extreme sniping abilities. -- Fix Caldari \| Fix Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 04:25:00 - [18] Bump for a not unreasonable idea on which further ripping is required?
Jurgen Cartis Caldari Interstellar Corporation of Exploration	Posted - 2007.09.03 05:10:00 - [19] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Could a forum moderator please rename this thread to something more appropriate, such as "Hardpoint rigs"? Try editing your original post. You can change the title there. On topic, as much as I like an 8 launcher Drake, I think you would get some SERIOUS balance issues. There are reasons that Tempests can only fit 6 guns, while the Mega fits 7. . . and an Auto-Pest vs. a Blaster-Mega is not always the gankathron's fight Worse issues with moving slots. . . Midslots have always been a precious commodity in pvp. And some ships (Some Recons, Drone Boats, etc.) don't need high slots to be effective as much as their peers do. Imagine an 8-midslot, 3-lowslot Rook. And I'm sure people can come up with much nastier variant ships. . . -------------------------------------------------- ICE Blueprint Sales FIRST!! -Yipsilanti Pfft. Never such a thing as a "last chance". ;) -Rauth
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 05:17:00 - [20] Quote: Try editing your original post. You can change the title there. Thanks. Quote: On topic, as much as I like an 8 launcher Drake, I think you would get some SERIOUS balance issues. There are reasons that Tempests can only fit 6 guns, while the Mega fits 7. . . and an Auto-Pest vs. a Blaster-Mega is not always the gankathron's fight I believe with the penalties quoted in the original post (or with a slight modification to them) it would be entirely possible to prevent an eight neutron blaster mega being a possibility, whilst allowing an eight electron blaster setup with ease. The same rules could, if properly balanced apply to each and every shiptype. Either increase the cpu/power penalty, or even apply both penalties simultaneously. Quote: Worse issues with moving slots. . . Midslots have always been a precious commodity in pvp. And some ships (Some Recons, Drone Boats, etc.) don't need high slots to be effective as much as their peers do. Imagine an 8-midslot, 3-lowslot Rook. And I'm sure people can come up with much nastier variant ships. . . Indeed, which is why when I posted the idea of interchanging one slot type for another or one turret type for another I specifically said I did not think it could work. It is the additional hardpoint rig in which I am most interested: The ones in the original post. For clarity, I will edit the posts that refer to anything other than these rigs.
Surrah	Posted - 2007.09.03 05:30:00 - [21] I think this is a fantastic idea. If for no other reason than unpredictability. As it is, when you see a ship, or even just its type on the scanner, you can instantly begin identifying its combat capablilities. A Scorpion can only have 4 launchers (I'm ignoring its turret slots). So if you can tank 4 Torpedo II's until the scorp goes cap dead, you've got him. <---Thats really a bad example, but currently assumptions can be made, and very accurately, about any ship you come across. Loosing that safety factor would make things a lot more fun on the small scale stuff.
Ellaine TashMurkon MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.09.03 08:41:00 - [22] You know this would end in 50 thousand people having 8 launcher Ravens to farm isk 25% faster?
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 09:24:00 - [23] Quote: You know this would end in 50 thousand people having 8 launcher Ravens to farm isk 25% faster? I admit I've been up a long time and so I may no longer be able to count, but wouldn't it be 33.3% faster? However, this wouldn't be a bad thing: It'll mean they stop fitting cloaks in their last slots out of greed and hence can be "policed" by the community. Also, please re-read the part where I mentioned that using these rigs should give a penalty to the fitting requirements of the weapon type for which they have provided an extra slot. Such a measure is designed specifically to make this a tactical fitting, rather than an "I-WIN" rig, such as the current Auxiliary Nano Pumps are. The idea is variety, not superiority: Detriments are the key to this.
Thorek Ironbrow	Posted - 2007.09.03 09:57:00 - [24] Would this add on the high slots as well? So that if you have 6 high slots with 6 turret hardpoints, you could put on one of your rigs and it would be boosted to 8 high slots with 8 turret hardpoints? If not then that'd be a good one to add: Extra Slottage I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's Hi Slot capacity at the expense of Power and CPU. Calibration Cost: 100 Bonus: +1 High Slot Drawback: -15% Penalty: Only one of this modifications can be fitted at a single time, any others will have no effect to the ships High Slots. Extra Slottage II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's Hi Slot capacity at the expense of Power and CPU. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +2 High Slot Drawback: -20% Penalty: Only one of this modifications can be fitted at a single time, any others will have no effect to the ships High Slots.
Joshua Mendle Gallente The Bewlay Bros. Inc	Posted - 2007.09.03 10:30:00 - [25] Bump this great idea. I'd love this, more ship modifications and augmentations. Needs more thought though, but great initial idea.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:25:00 - [26] People have quoted examples of ships that they believe may be unbalanced should rigs like these be brought into the game. I'd like to demonstrate why I do not believe this to be the case: Firstly let's start with the Megathron, which of course one would probably want to use to the turret housing I rigs to increase the maximum number of guns it can fit from seven to eight: Quote: Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use for turrets Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -10% With this in mind, let's assume the pilot has the best possible skills for both the ship and the rigging, meaning a 50% reduction in the penalties in using these rigs, which means for the one rig which would be fitted, a 5% increase in power and CPU requirements for turrets would be applied. Using the Neutron Blaster Cannon II as an example, the requirements for fitting would be thus when fitted to the hypothetically rigged Megathron: Quote: Neutron Blaster Cannon II CPU: 48.09 Power: 2233.035 With the Megathron sporting 687.5 CPU and 19375 power with the best skills, fitting eight of these on would rack up to a total power consumption of 17864.28 and a CPU consumption of 384.72 - leaving just 302.78 CPU and 1510.72 power - not enough in other words, to also fit any kind of tank without adding further rigs such as the Ancillary Current Router I. Assuming with the remaining 200 calibration we were to fit two of these, this would boost the Megathron to 23443.75 Power, which after fitting the turrets would leave some 5579.47 remaining - enough for dual reps, but not for the Microwarpdrive or Cap Injector which the Megathron dearly needs.
Thorek Ironbrow	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:28:00 - [27] Seems pretty balanced.
Mashie Saldana Hooligans Of War	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:30:00 - [28] I think this has crossed the devs minds already.
Nikol Kidman Sadistic Influence	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:35:00 - [29] raven navy issue with 8x t2 siege launcher, 8x med slots hrhrhrhrhr way to overpowered
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:35:00 - [30] The Tempest would be even more difficult than the Megathron, as it would require either to use the entire calibration amount for two tech one rigs, leaving no room for other rigging or to use the tech two rig, which would no doubt be prohibitively expensive and would leave only enough calibration for one Ancillary current router. Let's assume they go with the tech two rig for now: Quote: Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use for turrets Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -10% Again, let's assume the pilot has the best possible skills for both the ship and the rigging, meaning a 50% reduction in the penalties in using these rigs, which means for the one rig which would be fitted, a 5% increase in power and CPU requirements for turrets would be applied. Using the 800mm Repeating Artillery II as an example, the requirements for fitting would be thus when fitted to the hypothetically rigged Tempest: Quote: 800mm Repeating Artillery II CPU: 32.34 Power: 2079 With the Tempest sporting 687.5 CPU and 19375 power like the Megathron with the best skills, fitting eight of these on would rack up to a total power consumption of 16632 and a CPU consumption of 258.72 - leaving 428.78 CPU and 2743 power. Like the Megathron, this would require an Ancillary Current Router I to make a decent setup, which in this case is going to max out your calibration. With this power grid rig, the Tempest is boosted to 21312.5 power, which after the guns leaves 4680.5 power. Like the Megathron, this Tempest needs to get up close and as such would require a Microwaprdive, and as with the Megathron the obligitary Cap Injector and dual rep configuration. As I'm sure you realise, there's just not enough power to pull this off.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:50:00 - [31] Originally by: Nikol Kidman raven navy issue with 8x t2 siege launcher, 8x med slots hrhrhrhrhr way to overpowered As I've stated at least three times in this thread, I do not support the idea of switching highs for mids or lows for mids or however you wish it done. I myself only wish to see a rig that allows us to overcome the severe limitations that split-setup ships have put upon them by enabling us to increase the number of either turret or missile hardpoints a ship has - NOT alter the slot configuration in any way. I will however show you why a Navy Issue Raven with these rigs would not be overpowered. Like all faction ships, it only has 350 and not 400 calibration to play with - this means that after you've fitted the launcher rig you're left with only 150 calibration. Assume you are to fit a power grid rig to go along with it (which you would need should you want to fit a full rack of siege launchers) and you're left with 50 - not enough for a second power grid rig, and not enough for any missile rigs other than the Warhead Flare Catalyst (Explosion radius) or a shield rig, which any other than the operational solidifier could be squeezed in. Let's assume one launcher +1 rig (200), one Ancillary current router (100) and one EM resistance rig (50) to fill that gaping hole. Once these rigs are fitted, we get the following figures: Quote: Siege Missile Launcher II CPU: 69.3 Power: 1736.91 Quote: Raven Navy Issue CPU: 900 Power: 13062.5 In other words, to fit the eight launchers you'd be looking at 13985.28 power, which is more than the NIR has to offer in the first place: you'd need to be filling your lows with fitting mods just to make it work, and so you're better off going with currently available rigs and a few ballistic control systems instead!
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.03 11:52:00 - [32] Originally by: Mashie Saldana I think this has crossed the devs minds already. Very, very interesting: not however what I propose. I do not want to convert highs to mids to lows and so on but rather simply "add" turret or launcher slots at the expense of calibration and fitting requirements for the turrets or launchers.
Mashie Saldana Hooligans Of War	Posted - 2007.09.03 12:03:00 - [33] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Originally by: Mashie Saldana I think this has crossed the devs minds already. Very, very interesting: not however what I propose. I do not want to convert highs to mids to lows and so on but rather simply "add" turret or launcher slots at the expense of calibration and fitting requirements for the turrets or launchers. True, I would love a Sleipnir with 8 turrets according to your suggestion. However a Sleipnir with 7 mids would be an evil ship to fly as well.
T'sa Verok	Posted - 2007.09.03 15:22:00 - [34] Honestly I think this is going to be the far future of rigging, when ALL ships have several thousand calibration and access to all 10 rig slots (or 9 for tech 2 ships) (there are alot of slots sitting there that no ship uses on the UI). Complete manipulation of the ships loadouts, damage and potential is something every pilot dreams of and I am sure that CCP does aswell. Rigs I except: Turret Rigs in Expense for Missile slots Drone bay expands that penalty cargo bays Swaps bonuses, eg from Projectiles to Hybrids Turns a High Slot into a Med and Low (max 8) Turn a Low and Med slot into a High (max 8) Of course there is a problem with these ideas, as ships will be able to do insane damage with no tank or to have absolutely invincible tanks with no damage. All things would have to have stacking penalties and limitations.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 02:30:00 - [35] Quote: Of course there is a problem with these ideas, as ships will be able to do insane damage with no tank or to have absolutely invincible tanks with no damage. All things would have to have stacking penalties and limitations. The beauty of the rigs I propose is that this stacking penalty is built in to the penalty the rigs apply. Let's take a hypothetical turret that requires 1000 powergrid and 100 cpu (for ease of calculation) fitted by a character with their rigging skills maxed. If one were to fit two of the tech one turret augmentations, this would mean that the power and cpu requirements for turrets are increased by a factor of 1.05, then again by another 1.05. So: (1000 * 1.05) * 1.05 = 1102.5 (100 * 1.05) * 1.05 = 110.25
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.09.04 04:00:00 - [36] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Quote: Of course there is a problem with these ideas, as ships will be able to do insane damage with no tank or to have absolutely invincible tanks with no damage. All things would have to have stacking penalties and limitations. The beauty of the rigs I propose is that this stacking penalty is built in to the penalty the rigs apply. Let's take a hypothetical turret that requires 1000 powergrid and 100 cpu (for ease of calculation) fitted by a character with their rigging skills maxed. If one were to fit two of the tech one turret augmentations, this would mean that the power and cpu requirements for turrets are increased by a factor of 1.05, then again by another 1.05. So: (1000 * 1.05) * 1.05 = 1102.5 (100 * 1.05) * 1.05 = 110.25 And this wont matter for the 8 gun Hurricanes/tempets, 6 gun ruptures/vagabonds, 7 gun Muninns? 6 gun Eagles? It makes free high slots more valuable than they already are[I.E. secondary weapons] on sips where the double damage bonus is in place to reduce the number of turrets and allow utility options[missiles/nos/neut/smartbombs/gang mods] more easily. The same goes for mid/low slot conversion rigs. 7/5/7, 7 turret Tempest anyone? 7/4/7 7 turret Hurricane? Could an 8/4/6 Harb compare, even with 8 guns?[no], could a 7/4/8 Geddon compare?[no, an 8/3/8... no] Its just plain ridiculous.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 05:09:00 - [37] Quote: And this wont matter for the 8 gun Hurricanes/tempets, 6 gun ruptures/vagabonds, 7 gun Muninns? 6 gun Eagles? I'm not sure I understand you correctly. The "dual" penalty won't apply because they're only trying to fit one more weapon. I don't really see what you're trying to get across. Quote: It makes free high slots more valuable than they already are[I.E. secondary weapons] on [ships] where the double damage bonus is in place to reduce the number of turrets and allow utility options [missiles/nos/neut/smartbombs/gang mods] more easily. This is the trade off. If you want to max out your weapons on a command ship, it rules out the ability to fit a gang mod. Again, I'm struggling to see why you consider this a problem - it's a choice that an individual pilot would make. Quote: The same goes for mid/low slot conversion rigs. Again: I do not support the introduction of rigs that allow one to convert one slot type to another! I am proposing a rig that allows one to add additional turret or missile slots only.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.09.04 07:06:00 - [38] Because its a 33%-50% increase in primary DPS for a large amount of ships balanced around having less turrets than others.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 10:21:00 - [39] Originally by: Goumindong Because its a 33%-50% increase in primary DPS for a large amount of ships balanced around having less turrets than others. Ah, now I understand: I do however disagree, if you'd allow me to demonstrate. I will exclude drones from these examples, as these rigs will not affect drones and as such are not relevant to this discussion. Each setup will be based on maximum possible skills with the ships and rigs, and I will exclude extraneous fittings for the sake of simplicity. Rigged Hurricane (max damage currently): 6x 425mm Autocannon II (Hail M) 6x Gyrostabilizer II 1x Projectile Collision Accelerator 292.5/500 CPU used 879.18/1687.5 power used 683 Damage Per Second (before resists), 1517 "Alpha Strike" Rigged Hurricane (proposed max damage): 8x 425mm Autocannon II (Hail M) 6x Gyrostabilizer II 1x +2 Turret rig 337.92/500 CPU used 1164.24/1687.5 power used 912 Damage per Second (before resists), 2024 "Alpha Strike" As you can see, this is an increase of approximately 25%, not 33-50% as you suggest. It also severely reduces the fitting capabilities of the ship. Given that we've filled the lows with gyros, we'd have to fit some form of shield tank on - in this instance, something like a large shield booster and cap injector which would eat up pretty much all the remaining power and cpu from this ship. In short, it wouldn't create imbalance with the Hurricane, as you would be sacrificing so much to do this - and once a ship is rigged, there's no going back. I will move onto your other "imbalanced" ships in the following posts.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 10:33:00 - [40] I'll ignore the Rupture (feel free to run the numbers yourself) and move straight onto the Vagabond. Vagabond (max damage current) 5x 425mm Autocannon II (Hail M) 5x Gyrostabilizer II 1x Projectile Collision Accelerator 243.75/493.75 CPU used 732.65/1068.75 power used 445 Damage Per Second (before resists), 992 "Alpha Strike" Vagabond (max damage proposed) 6x 425mm Autocannon II (Hail M) 5x Gyrostabilizer II 1x +1 turret rig 1x Projectile Collision Accelerator 268.44/493.75 CPU used 1173/1068.75 power used 712 Damage Per Second (before resists), 1188 "Alpha Strike" Now this is closer to your supposed 33% increase, but as you can plainly see we're already using too much power. Time to downgrade the guns... Vagabond (max damage proposed) 6x 220mm Vulcan Autocannon II (Hail M) 5x Gyrostabilizer II 1x +1 turret rig 1x Projectile Collision Accelerator 253.95/493.75 CPU used 659.57/1068.75 power used 510 Damage Per Second (before resists), 954 "Alpha Strike" As you can plainly see, this has increased the DPS by a marginal amount, but the Alpha Strike is down... In short, I'm sure you can tell that such rigs would overpower nothing.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 10:46:00 - [41] Again I'll skip one (Muninn) and move straight onto the Eagle. There's little point in touching on the Muninn, as what is true for the Vagabond will also hold true for the Muninn. I'll be setting the eagle up with blasters, as these give the best DPS of all hybrid weapons. Eagle (current max damage) 4x Heavy Neutron Blaster II 4x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1x Hybrid Collision Accelerator I 1x Hybrid Burst Aerator I 225/547.5 CPU used 845.43/1093.75 power used 377 Damage Per Second, 1047 "Alpha Strike" Eagle (proposed max damage) 6x Heavy Nuetron Blaster II 4x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1x +2 Turret Rig 285.69/547.5 CPU used 1148.8/1093.75 power used 552 Damage Per Second, 1554 "Alpha Strike" As we can see, this no longer fits either. So let's downgrade the guns again... Eagle (proposed max damage) 6x Heavy Ion Blaster II 4x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1x +2 Turret Rig 276.24/547.5 CPU used 899.86/1093.75 power used 522 Damage Per Second, 1248 "Alpha Strike" So this setup would allow an increase of around 38% DPS - but with nowhere near enough power grid to fit the MWD required to get up close with those blasters and to have any kind of tank at all. Again, no imbalance!
Kerdrak 3B Legio IX Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.09.04 11:22:00 - [42] I like this idea. Maybe a drone bay rig expander could be awesome too. ________________________________________
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.09.04 13:57:00 - [43] Edited by: Goumindong on 04/09/2007 13:59:25 Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos I'll ignore the ship that benefits most and move straight onto the ship that benefits least Also, you are only using too much powergrid because you wont downgrade guns and have weapon damage rigs on the ship. For the vagabond this will be a 20% increase in primary weapon DPS. For the Rupture, 50%, for the Muninn, 40%. ed: With the Eagle, you ignore Electron Blasters[which means MWD,web,scram, invuln,LSE,DC, 3xmfs]
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 14:34:00 - [44] Originally by: Goumindong I'm a picky bugger who probably has been killed by Camilo at some point, and so is being deliberately obstinate. There, fixed it for you I've shown you with figures why I believe this wouldn't be overpowered. If you believe it would be, provide solid statistics that prove it so. Otherwise, move on troll.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 15:44:00 - [45] Let's look at a full damage setup for the Muninn then, if you believe it will be such an issue. Obviously one would armour tank this ship, but we'll setup for max damage at present for the sake of running these numbers 3x Gyrostabilizer II 2x Ballistic Control System II 1x 10MN Microwarpdrive 2x Cap Recharger 5x 425mm Autocannon II 2x Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II 1x Projectile Burst Aerator 1x Warhead Calefaction Catalyst 415/443.75 CPU used 1126.45/1450 power used 653 DPS & 1212 AS If this were allowed to fit two more turrets: 5x Gyrostabilizer II 1x 10mn Microwarpdrive II 2x Cap Recharger II 7x 425mm Autocannon II 1x +2 Turret rig 1x whatever you like for 100 calibration 360.68/443.75 CPU used 1190.71/1450 power used 791 DPS & 1764 AS So a 21% - and not 40% - increase in DPS. If you disagree, show me why rather than simply stating it is so.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.09.04 15:57:00 - [46] Edited by: Goumindong on 04/09/2007 15:59:07 Those are utterly ridiculous fits. Its an LSE on the Eagle, not an LSB. You dont freaking put BCS on a Muninn[though the missile launchers are right]... You should at least expect a little tank.
Ellaine TashMurkon MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.09.04 15:58:00 - [47] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Quote: You know this would end in 50 thousand people having 8 launcher Ravens to farm isk 25% faster? I admit I've been up a long time and so I may no longer be able to count, but wouldn't it be 33.3% faster?
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.04 16:37:00 - [48] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 04/09/2007 16:40:34 Quote: Its an LSE on the Eagle, not an LSB. Doesn't matter. Neither an LSE nor LSB changes the DPS in any way whatsoever and the LSB has higher fitting requirements than the LSE in terms of CPU, of which the Eagle has plenty. Quote: You dont freaking put BCS on a Muninn[though the missile launchers are right]... You should at least expect a little tank. Take off the BCS and you decrease the DPS. I stated we were talking about hypothetical max damage setups, and that's it for the Muninn currently: 3x Gyro, 2x BCS, 5x 425's 2x HAM. In either case, were you to sacrifice damage mods for tank you'd decrease the DPS by an equal proportion. The only different would be the type of weapon in question, not the damage potential. Run the numbers on a fully tanked Muninn yourself, and you'll see.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 08:56:00 - [49] Let's look at the max potential damage output of the current Rupture, and compare it to a rupture with +turret rigs. Current max potential damage: 3x Gyrostabilizer II 2x Ballistic Control System II (mids unimportant) 4x 425mm AutoCannon II (Hail M) 2x Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II (Rage Assault) Projectile Burst Aerator I Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I 323.75/406.25 CPU uesd 813.92/1075 power used 546 DPS, 969 AS As I pointed out before with the Muninn, simply filling with Gyrostabilizers beyond three is simply not worth it. For pure damage (and the setup is unrealistic, but provides maximum possible damage) 3x gyro 2x bcs is the best one can get, with 1x projectile damage rig and 1x missile damage rig. New potential max damage setup: 6x 425mm Autocannon II (mids unimportant) 5x Gyrostabilizer II +2 turret rig (no more damage rigs possible due to lack of calibration) 268.44 CPU used 878.18/1075 power used 534 DPS / 1188 AS Kindly point out to me where this 50% extra DPS comes from...
Ellaine TashMurkon MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.09.05 09:01:00 - [50] Raven, Tempest :) Tempest would become the only choice for fleet warfare :)
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 09:35:00 - [51] I'm going to guess by fleet you do not mean close range max damage, but rather sniping? If so, here are the numbers on the Tempest setup for pure damage at range. Obviously you wouldn't spam quite so many Gyro's, but I'm sure you understand that in this instance it both makes my life easier, and demonstrates more effectively why these rigs would overpower nothing. Current: 4x Gyrostabilizer II 2x Ballistic Control System II (mids unimportant) 6x 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II 2x Cruise Missile Launcher II 2x Ancillary Current Router I 1x Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I 515.45/687.5 CPU used 21674.4/23443.75 power used 499 DPS & 3573 AS Again this is max damage. You'll lose one damage per second if you use a projectile weapon rig instead, but of course that damage would be instantaneous and probably preferable. Either way, you're within the fitting constraints. Proposed max: 8x 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II (mids unimportant) 4x Gyrostabilizer II 2x Reactor Control Unit II 1x Ancillary Current Router I 1x +2 turret rig 446.52/687.5 CPU used 27031/28185.78 power used 504 DPS & 4768 AS Which as I'm sure you can see is a marginal DPS incresae. The Alpha strike however is impressive, but even this is currently attainable with the Maelstrom. Given that a +2 turret rig should be a T2 rig, I see no problem here. As for the Raven, I have run the numbers on the Navy Issue Raven, and what holds true there will hold true for the regular Raven.
Ellaine TashMurkon MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.09.05 10:01:00 - [52] Yes I mean sniping. And Your operates on completely unrealistic setups. On sniper ranges, cruise missles are suplement, if ever used. They will rarely hit before target is dead or gone. People fit assault launchers, cloaks, drone range augmentors, salvagers, whatever - just because suplementing firepower with those 2 cruises is disputable, often just waste of grid (that You can use for something nice like a 1600mm plate :) Putting 2 BCU is a pure waste of low slots. And You need them for tracking, gyro and tank. Projectile damage rig is stacked with gyro and utterly useless. So You end with 33% damage increase on a ship that has both damage and ROF bonuses and becomes a totan overkill :)
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 10:23:00 - [53] I would like to remind you all that these rigs would be highly desirable, and as such prohibitively expensive. +1 rigs would be T1, +2 rigs T2 - meaning they would START at over 100 million isk. Quite probably these would cost far, far more than this much as many of the currently available T2 rigs do. Originally by: Ellaine TashMurkon Yes I mean sniping. And Your operates on completely unrealistic setups. As stated, these are hypothetical max damage setups. They are not intended to be realistic, but rather demonstrate the damage potential of currently available ships. Quote: On sniper ranges, cruise missles are suplement, if ever used. They will rarely hit before target is dead or gone. People fit assault launchers, cloaks, drone range augmentors, salvagers, whatever - just because suplementing firepower with those 2 cruises is disputable, often just waste of grid (that You can use for something nice like a 1600mm plate :) Understood, and again this is here to show max damage. I will momentarily run the numbers for you on a pure gun tempest, but the fact remains that cruise missile, despite their undesirability, supplement your DPS nicely and reach as far as your guns in this theoretical example. The nature of combat in eve and the undesirability of missiles is a serious issue, but not one that impacts upon the discussion herein. Quote: Putting 2 BCU is a pure waste of low slots. And You need them for tracking, gyro and tank. Projectile damage rig is stacked with gyro and utterly useless. Again, not when you're fitting for maximum damage. You cannot compare a tanked setup to a damage setup - and given that a + turrets or + missiles rig is effectively a + damage rig, the only "fair" comparison is to a setup with max potential damage. Anyway, pure gunboat Tempest. I will exclude all extraneous fittings, and yes the weapon upgrades are stacknerfed so you would use something else. In this instance though, we are only interested in the DPS, as it is this that would make the ship overpowered rather than it's tanking capabilities. Given the penalty to turret/launcher power and CPU use, any ship with these rigs would have limited capabilities beyond damage output. Current: 6x Gyrostabilizer II (mids unimportant) 6x 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II (no rigs, as full gyro would make them extraneous) 391.5/687.5 CPU used 19311/19375 power used 0/400 Calibration used 388 DPS & 3622 AS Proposed: 4x Gyrostabilizer II 2x Reactor Control Unit II (mids unimportant) 8x 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II 1x Ancillary Current Router 1x +2 Turret Rig 446.52/687.5 CPU used 27031/28185.78 CPU used 400/400 Calibration used 504 DPS & 4768 AS As you can see, that's just short of a 30% increase in damage potential, at a cost of well beyond 100,000,000 ISK in rigs. Again, I see no problem.
Ellaine TashMurkon MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.09.05 10:47:00 - [54] The problem lies not in comparing old and new tempest, its ok to have a very high damage BS, its in comparing new tempest with any other BS. I smell the risk of unifying fleet battles to one ship because all others are like 20% weaker. But I may be wrong. One solution would be having hardpoint rigs cost 250 calibration, making people unable to fit 2xT1 versions and creating some problems with fitting 2 more rigs on top of that one. For pricing - T1 rigs will not be extremely expensive because they are built from regular and massive drops from ratting and missions. Even if for example RA and their friends decides to consume all Angel ratting salvagables from their controlled lands, mission runners in empire will smell it over time and start running angel missions because they will be doing 40 million from salvage per one lvl 4. Then our parts price will drop slowly until market is satisfied and whole rig family comes back to prices about 20-30 million.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 11:26:00 - [55] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 11:30:39 Quote: The problem lies not in comparing old and new tempest, its ok to have a very high damage BS, its in comparing new tempest with any other BS. Ah, I see what you mean. There's only one other tier 2 sniperboat that would benefit from these rigs, and to be honest I suspect it would benefit more than the Tempest: The Megathron. Current max damage: 7x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II (mids unimportant) 7x 425mm Railgun II 383 DPS & 1926 AS Proposed max damage: 7x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II (mids unimportant) 8x 425mm Railgun II 1x Ancillary Current Router 1x +1 Turret 440 DPS & 2200 AS As you can see, the only other tier 2 sniper lacking turret points would be ~60 DPS short of what a fully rigged out Tempest could put out, but unlike the tempest this could use the +1 rig (which would be much cheaper than the +2). If you fitted a +1 turret rig on a tempest, you're looking at 455 DPS & 4228 AS - perfectly acceptable. Quote: For pricing - T1 rigs will not be extremely expensive because they are built from regular and massive drops from ratting and missions. I expect they will rise to around the same price that the cargo expander rigs go for, because if you could would you not add an extra hardpoint to your ships? Right now, I believe that would place them at the 30-40m mark, which is still quite expensive for a rig. T2 would certainly be greater than 100m, if not 200m. Quote: One solution would be having hardpoint rigs cost 250 calibration, making people unable to fit 2xT1 versions and creating some problems with fitting 2 more rigs on top of that one. Yes, this would work quite well. The alternative I thought of was to increase the penalty from 10% (reduced to 5% with max skills) to 20% increase in power and CPU consumption for turrets/missiles. Increasing the calibration required for these rigs to 250 and 350 respectively would probably be a better solution, but either would perform the necessary task.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 11:38:00 - [56] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 11:39:05 The only other full-blown eight turret rigged sniperboat would be the Armageddon: Current: 1x Power Diagnostic System I 7x Heatsink II (mids unimportant) 7x Tachyon Beam Laser II 2x Ancillary Current Router 511 DPS & 2521 AS Proposed: 2x Reactor Control Unit II 6x Heatsink II (mids unimportant) 8x Tachyon Beam Laser II 2x Ancillary Current Router I 1x +1 Turret 584 DPS & 2880 AS So the rigged Armageddon equals the damage potential of the Tempest, but obviously your cap isn't going to last very long running eight Tachyons. Again, it doesn't seem like an unreasonable figure. These rigs wouldn't actually create any problems that do not already exist: The Armageddon and Tempest are already considered two of the best sniping battleships, these rigs would merely allow them to excel further in that role - and allow lesser ships to equal what these behemoths can currently achieve.
Ellaine TashMurkon MetaForge Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.09.05 11:41:00 - [57] Edited by: Ellaine TashMurkon on 05/09/2007 11:42:10 Ok, we can guess 30-40 million pricing if its based on minmatar salvage parts. There's a tweak with cargo expanders price - most people run missions for Caldari so most minmatar salvagables probably come from 0.0. And most angel regions are under influence of one player faction (RA+Goon+TCF+friends). Thats why they cost so much (I mean - alloyed tritanium bar) :)
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 12:01:00 - [58] It is of course impossible without also deciding what salvage components would be required to make these rigs to get an approximate cost. As I do not manufacture rigs myself, I would appreciate if someone else who likes this idea was willing to come up with a few proposals so as to set the value of these rigs. Following on from the suggestions above, here are the two modified rig suggestions to combat the high damage full turret/missile boats that people seem to fear: Originally by: "Increased Calibration" Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use Calibration Cost: 250 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 350 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 250 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 350 Bonus: +2 launcher slots Drawback: -10% Originally by: "Increased Power & CPU Penalty" Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -20% Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -20% Supplemental Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -20% Supplemental Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 launcher slots Drawback: -20%
Lisento Slaven Amarr Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.09.05 16:27:00 - [59] Do these numbers take into account the 10% reduction from the skill that requires them? I've been looking over the max-damage setups and I'm curious how these sort of changes would effect NPCer's such as the Raven? Would free up those two high slots which are usually salvager+tractor beam for two more launchers to do the mission faster (if they can still fit their tanks with your proposed rigs). Have you considered these rigs on dreadnaughts or carriers? Or even the rorqual =P --- Put in space whales!
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 17:18:00 - [60] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 17:24:07 Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 17:19:42 Originally by: Lisento Slaven Do these numbers take into account the 10% reduction from the skill that requires them? Yes, each setup was based on having the relevant rigging skilled trained up to 5. Quote: I've been looking over the max-damage setups and I'm curious how these sort of changes would effect NPCer's such as the Raven? Would free up those two high slots which are usually salvager+tractor beam for two more launchers to do the mission faster (if they can still fit their tanks with your proposed rigs). It's certainly possible, but it adds it's own problems. Currently something like this would be applicable for mission running. I've calculated these using T1 torps, as surely using T2 ammo for PVE is utter madness. Should you disagree, feel free to run the numbers accordingly: 2x Co Processor II 3x Ballistic Control System II 1x XL Shield Booster II 1x Shield Boost Amplifier II 3x Shield Hardener (rat specific) 1x Cap Recharger II 6x Siege Missile Launcher II 1x Tractor Beam 1x Salvager 1x Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I 1x Bay Loading Accelerator I 1024.84/1058.75 CPU used 10493.2/11875 power used 655 DPS / 4825 AS It's been a long time since I ran any missions (or for that matter even flew a raven), so it might be way off the mark. So, moving swiftly on to the +2 launcher rigged Raven. The tank would not change, but the lows would to make it all work: 3x Coprocessor II 1x Reactor Control Unit II 1x Ballistic Control System II 1x XL Shield Booster II 1x Shield Boost Amplifier II 3x Shield Hardener (rat specific) 1x Cap Recharger II 8x Siege Missile Launcher II 1x +2 launcher rig 1x Ancillary Current Router I 1102.65/1164.63 CPU used 14454.28/15021.88 power used 616 DPS & 5448 So as we can see the raven would actually perform better with six launchers than eight, using currently available missile rigs and BCS rather than using up practically all your lows + rigs to make the extra two launchers fit. If you're fitting cruise however, things do work a bit better: 2x Coprocessor II 3x Ballistic Control System II 1x XL Shield Booster II 1x Shield Boost Amplifier II 3x Shield Hardener (rat specific) 1x Cap Recharger 8x Cruise Missile Launcher II 1x +2 launcher rig (another rig or two within 100 calibration, probably shields) 1006.89/1058.75 CPU used 10013.6/11875 power used 600 DPS & 4168 AS Now, a similar setup with 6 cruise (using missile rigs + 3 BCS) puts out 474 DPS & 3216 AS, so this rig provides an increase of just short of 27% damage with cruise missiles. With torpedoes, it's negligible. I'm not running the numbers on another raven, but I'm sure that the best results could be achieved by using the +1 launcher rig and torpedoes, allowing room for more rigs and retaining the utility slot. Quote: Have you considered these rigs on dreadnaughts or carriers? Or even the rorqual =P Should've kept quiet on that one, eh? Personally, I'd quite like to have a Dread that could outdamage a battleship without siege mode. I think it would make a useful and interesting addition to fleet warfare. That said, there are already rigs that have no effect on capital ships: These rigs could easily be made one of them.
Lisento Slaven Amarr Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.09.05 18:30:00 - [61] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 17:24:07 Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 17:19:42 It's been a long time since I ran any missions (or for that matter even flew a raven), so it might be way off the mark. So, moving swiftly on to the +2 launcher rigged Raven. The tank would not change, but the lows would to make it all work: Quote: Have you considered these rigs on dreadnaughts or carriers? Or even the rorqual =P Should've kept quiet on that one, eh? Personally, I'd quite like to have a Dread that could outdamage a battleship without siege mode. I think it would make a useful and interesting addition to fleet warfare. That said, there are already rigs that have no effect on capital ships: These rigs could easily be made one of them. Yeah I think you're slightly off with the setup for the Raven as I use a full t2 setup practically (no rigs though) and don't use any co-processor's to fit it. I can't exactly go check what it is because I'm -9.4 and it's in a 1.0 system. Not in the mood for running around in a pod in high sec =P As far as the dreads go do you mean more damage over time (dot) then a BS or alpha? I thought dread's do a nice amount of damage even without being in siege mode (at least raw damage). But putting another launcher/turret on a dread...or even putting them on carriers (I can picture some wacky setups) would be something definitely worth looking into =P --- Put in space whales!
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 19:01:00 - [62] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 19:02:00 Moros: 768 DPS (4775 AS) + 1109 drone damage Moros +1 turret: 1024 DPS (6368 AS) + 1109 drone damage That's it fitted with nothing but MFS in the lows. With the Moros, it's really all about the drones until you put it in siege mode. Having an extra turret adds a really nice boost, as the dreads have so few to begin with. Megathron: 887 DPS (3677 AS) + 317 drone damage Megathron +1 turret: 1016 DPS (4200 AS) + 317 drone damage Those figures would be even higher with T2 ammo in the Megathron. As for the T2 fitted Raven, I think if you use Cruise rather than Torp it's entirely possible to fit them entirely with T2 using no fitting mods.
Lisento Slaven Amarr Vendetta Underground Rule of Three	Posted - 2007.09.05 19:58:00 - [63] I support this because when I get a naglfar I'd like to have 4 artillery instead of 2 and 2 torps =P --- Put in space whales!
king jks Exanimo Inc Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.09.05 21:17:00 - [64] The thing I'd say is make it so only 1 fits on a ship. Also the T2 rigs shouldn't give more slots, but maybe have less of a drawback. Only thing is this would make 8 blaster astartes and megas possible >_> ...but will it blend?
king jks Exanimo Inc Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.09.05 21:18:00 - [65] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 05/09/2007 19:02:00 Moros: 768 DPS (4775 AS) + 1109 drone damage Moros +1 turret: 1024 DPS (6368 AS) + 1109 drone damage That's it fitted with nothing but MFS in the lows. With the Moros, it's really all about the drones until you put it in siege mode. Having an extra turret adds a really nice boost, as the dreads have so few to begin with. Megathron: 887 DPS (3677 AS) + 317 drone damage Megathron +1 turret: 1016 DPS (4200 AS) + 317 drone damage Those figures would be even higher with T2 ammo in the Megathron. As for the T2 fitted Raven, I think if you use Cruise rather than Torp it's entirely possible to fit them entirely with T2 using no fitting mods. Just would like to point out that the dps with 4 turrets will be much lower than the dps with 3 turrets since you won't be in siege. ...but will it blend?
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.05 21:52:00 - [66] Quote: The thing I'd say is make it so only 1 fits on a ship. Also the T2 rigs shouldn't give more slots, but maybe have less of a drawback. Only thing is this would make 8 blaster astartes and megas possible >_> The problem with not having a +2 rig but having a +1 rig is that it would specifically benefit Gallente & Amarr over the Caldari and Minmatar, in that they generally only have one "utility" slot on the vast majority of their ships. The impetus behind this was to provide a solution for the unpopular split-setup ships that predominate amongst the Caldari and Minmatar and to allow greater variety in fittings: For example, abandoning the ship's bonus and fitting missiles to a Vagabond to sidestep the tracking issues of travelling at 6km/s+ or fitting a full rack of guns on an Eagle. As for fitting one only, this is something that we have touched upon. Were the calibration for the +1 rig set at 250 this would be the case, meaning that anyone who wanted +2 turrets would have no choice but to splash out on the T2 rig. As it stands (T1 calibration 200, T2 calibration 300), you would be making your own life difficult by fitting two of the tech one rigs: you would be using up all your calibration (whereas with a T2 rig you could also fit some resistance rigs or something alongside your turret rig) and you would have the penalty to fitting requirements applied twice - a stacking penalty, if you will. Quote: Just would like to point out that the dps with 4 turrets will be much lower than the dps with 3 turrets since you won't be in siege. But Siege does nasty things to you. If someone were to opt for an extra turret on a Dreadnought, it would be for doing things other than shooting at starbases, stations and other capitals - like scaring the hell out of battleship pilots. Right now, with the exception of the Moros and it's drones, most well fitted & rigged battleships can tank an unsieged dreadnought, and can laugh when a sieged dreadnought tries to actually hit them.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.09.05 22:28:00 - [67] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos With the Tempest sporting 687.5 CPU and 19375 power like the Megathron with the best skills, fitting eight of these on would rack up to a total power consumption of 16632 and a CPU consumption of 258.72 - leaving 428.78 CPU and 2743 power. Like the Megathron, this would require an Ancillary Current Router I to make a decent setup, which in this case is going to max out your calibration. No, it would not, just like a good megathron does not require an ACR 8x800 repeaters[not that you cant downsize for a measly 4% DPS reduction. Mwd, web, web, scram, sensor booster 1600,1600, eanm, dc, dmg, dmg That is 989 GUN dps with hail, has 2 free mids for ewar, and plenty of powergrid left
Salpad	Posted - 2007.09.06 08:29:00 - [68] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 12/06/2007 04:48:40I haven't looked through every single ship yet, but random testing shows that ships have a calibration capacity of 400. I have set them at 200 and 300 for tech one and two respectively, meaning that the best possible configuration would be the addition of two turret/launcher slots using the tech two rig. In the example of the Apocalypse that you gave, this would mean a total of 4 maximum launcher slots, with 100 calibration left. It is not clear to me whether your proposal is that these rigs should give more slots, or whether they should convert hardpoints into other hardpoint types, so that for instance an "extra launcher" rig would change a Merlin from having 2 launcher slots and 2 turret slots, and to have 3 launcher slots and 1 turret slot. The later sounds balanced, but the former, giving extra slots, probably isn't.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.06 08:43:00 - [69] Quote: It is not clear to me whether your proposal is that these rigs should give more slots, or whether they should convert hardpoints into other hardpoint types, so that for instance an "extra launcher" rig would change a Merlin from having 2 launcher slots and 2 turret slots, and to have 3 launcher slots and 1 turret slot. The later sounds balanced, but the former, giving extra slots, probably isn't. The proposal is for a rig that would simply add extra hardpoints for missile. In the example of the Merlin, a +1 launcher rig would give you 3 launcher slots and 2 turret slots. I drew up numbers also on the proposal earlier in this thread for a rig that removes missile or turret slots in favour of the other (+1 missile -1 turret or vice versa), but this would not change the potential damage output of any ship at all and as such would have no effect on balance: Eight gun Tempests would still be possible. It would just be the same thing with a different flavour.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.06 09:03:00 - [70] Quote: 8x800 repeaters[not that you cant downsize for a measly 4% DPS reduction. Mwd, web, web, scram, sensor booster 1600,1600, eanm, dc, dmg, dmg This you mean? Tempest: 1x +2 Turret rig (something for 100 calibration, resists maybe?) 2x Gyro II (60 CPU 2 PG) 2x 1600 RT (56 CPU 1000 PG) 1x EANM II (36 CPU 1 PG) 1x DC II (30 CPU 1 PG) 100MN MWD II (75 CPU 1375 PG) WD II (44 CPU 1 PG) 2x Web II (60 CPU 2 PG) 1x SB II (10 CPU 1 PG) 8x Dual 650mm II (239.4 CPU 12474 PG) 610.4 / 687.5 CPU 14857 / 19375 power 944 DPS & 3104 AS Which is no worse than a damage fitted Megathron using currently available rigs. Compare it to an almost identical setup currently using 6x 800mm and 2x Siege for damage with 1x Projectile Collision Accelerator I & 1x Projectile Burst Aerator I and the figures come to: 945 DPS / 2714 AS and the same setup using the aforementioned 650's: 905 DPS / 2462 AS So with like for like guns, thats a measly 4% increase in DPS with two extra turrets: Again no imbalance. You're beating a dead horse goumindong...
aldarrin	Posted - 2007.09.06 13:53:00 - [71] /signed maybe this way the ferox and eagle would get some flight time. -- Flame on.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys	Posted - 2007.09.06 14:01:00 - [72] Edited by: Goumindong on 06/09/2007 14:04:38 It is just as good as that mega in the short range, without the longer range penalties that the mega has. Yea, its a problem. ed: And no, the siege fits do not do that much DPS. 6 x 800 [hail] + 2x siege = 850 dps, with more skill requirements and a much much harder time fitting
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.06 15:20:00 - [73] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 06/09/2007 15:23:47 Quote: It is just as good as that mega in the short range, without the longer range penalties that the mega has. Yea, its a problem. Megathron with Neutrons can hit at 6.8 optimal with 6.3 falloff for a grand total of 19.4KM using Void. Tempest with Hail can hit at 3 optimal with 10 falloff for a grand total of 23KM. Oh noes! Mega is outranged by 3.6KM! A whole 19% further. It's going to break the "balance" for sure! Quote: And no, the siege fits do not do that much DPS. 6 x 800 [hail] + 2x siege = 850 dps, with more skill requirements and a much much harder time fitting Your figures are incorrect as you have failed in comprehension. Reread my post above where it clearly states that the damage potential that these rigs would bring would be only marginally (4%) greater than what can currently be achieved with existing rigs. In the case of the tempest, that's two projectile rigs - which if you chose to fit a +2 turret rig you would not have enough calibration left to use. As for your argument about skill training, that really made me laugh out loud. There are numerous forum posts complaining that the training time for missiles is too short in comparison to that of turrets. All in all, one can have Siege Missile II's fully trained up (without learning skills or implants) in 90 days. Autocannons would take you around 170 days, plus the time needed to train up for Artillery (which unless you're strange, you'd need as well). Coincidentally, this is around 90 days too. You also failed to take into account that you would need the appropriate rigging skill trained up to 5 in the examples above, else suffer greater penalties to fitting. To do this would take you a further 60 days, assuming that the "Hardpoint Rigging" skill that would be used here is level three. Personally I'd suggest it be level 5. So give it up, you know you're wrong and are being obstinate. I'm beginning to think you just fear change, as you seem to proliferate as a nay-saying voice in many threads on these forums.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.07 09:45:00 - [74] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 07/09/2007 09:47:08 I missed another corker from Goumindong: Quote: No, it [the Tempest with a +2 turret rig) would not, just like a good megathron does not require an ACR A Megathron can indeed be fit out just fine without using hybrid rigs. Once you factor in the penalty for the rigs I propose (simply multiply the power and cpu requirements by 1.05 to calculate what a pilot with this rigging skill trained to 5 would get, or 1.09 for level 1) and then add the hybrid rig (which would be required for the damage potential listed about), and you'll see that fitting it becomes a real pain in the neck. Simply put, the existing weapon rigs have shown that it's a fallacy that some ships retain their balance by virtue of their slot configuration. There would be only a marginal increase in damage per second should any ship be allowed to fill it's high slots with it's primary weapon type compared to what is currently attainable with split weapon systems (or simply with a utility slot) and the appropriate damage mods / rigs.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.08 12:07:00 - [75] Daily bump to see if there are any more comments on this idea, or any potential problems I might be able to address.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.10 10:14:00 - [76] Another bump to see if there's anything else I can cover on this idea that people may see as an issue, or any issues I may not have adequately covered.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.12 12:46:00 - [77] No more comments? Oh well, back to the top we go...
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.14 14:13:00 - [78] Bak to the top we go. I love the idea of rigs that increase the versatility of ships and allow us to choose the hulls we like rather than simply the bonuses we like, and I hope you do to. If you don't, I'd like to hear why! Hardpoint Rigs
Del Narveux Dukes of Hazard	Posted - 2007.09.14 14:17:00 - [79] If its just affecting turret/missile hardpoints and not adding actual highslots, and you can only have one such mod, this might work. _________________ [SAK] Alumnus--And Proud Of It! -- aka Cpt Bogus Is that my torped sig cloaking your base? Originally by: Wrangler Well, at least we have forum PvP..
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.14 17:58:00 - [80] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 14/09/2007 17:59:34 Quote: If its just affecting turret/missile hardpoints and not adding actual highslots, and you can only have one such mod, this might work. You are correct, this idea is only to amend turret/missile hardpoints and not adjust the slot configuration of a ship. For example, a Megathron would never alter from an 8-4-7 layout with these rigs, but could be fitted with 8 turrets in it's highslots at the expense of 200 calibration (half of the ship's allotment) and with an added penalty to the CPU and power requirements for the turrets. I would not wish to alter the layout of ships, as it is here that they retain their balance. Altering what a ship can sport in the way of armaments however would be fantastic in regards to fitting and skills, and would provide some much needed variety in regards to what ships and setups would be seen on the battlefield. In it's current incarnation, it would be possible (but ultimately self defeating) to fit two +1 turret/missile rigs on any ship. However, one would receive a stacked fitting penalty for doing so and of course you would have no calibration left for other rigs. There is also the T2 rig (which provides +2 turret/missile hardpoints) coming in at 300 calibration, but this would be prohibitively expensive to my mind. Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.17 23:46:00 - [81] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 17/09/2007 23:49:09 Looking for more feedback on this idea. For those of you who don't want to trawl through the whole thread, the idea in question is this: Quote: Fittings rigs: We currently have rigs to increase the power grid of a ship, and I can only surmise there's a very good reason we don't have rigs to increase a ship's CPU allotment... although it eludes me at present. My proposition however is the addition of a rig that allows you to alter the hi-slot allotment on a given ship. For example: Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 launcher slots Drawback: -10% My reasoning is simple: When I first heard about rigs, I was rather excited - I assumed (incorrectly) that it would allow us much greater flexibility in fitting ships, but instead it's simply given us "OMGWTFBBQPWN" damage setups, unbreakable tanks and oodles of cap. The above would allow us to choose what we want to do with a specific ship's hull, rather than being forced into the same ships time and time again. We could start choosing the ships we like, and not just the bonuses we like. For those of you who aren't as strange as I and who don't want to fly a fully missile fitted Vengeance, what about squeezing that extra turret onto a Megathron? Giving the Cerberus a full rack of HAMs? Turning the Vagabond into a missile boat from hell? As the post above clarifies, I do not seek to alter the slot configuration of any ship, but merely which weapon types that ship can fit. A notable example would be industrial ships, which would benefit greatly from being able to use missile launchers and defender missiles. Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 16:56:00 - [82] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 17:04:01 There have been comments made concerning this idea in another thread stating that an eight gun Tempest would outdamage and eight gun Megathron. Using similar plated damage setups: Tempest: 2x Gyro 2x 1600 RT 1x EANM 1x DC 1x 100mn MWD 1x Warp Disruptor 1x Stasis Web 1x Heavy Cap Booster 1x Sensor Booster 8x 800mm Repeating /w Domination EMP +2 Turret rig 936 Gun DPS, 3232 Alpha at 3 + 20 KM Megathron: 2x Magstab 1x DC 1x EANM 1x RCU 2x 1600mm RT 1x 100MN MWD 1x Heavy Cap Booster 1x Warp Disruptor 1x Stasis Web 8x Neutron Blaster /w DG Antimatter +1 Turret rig 992 Gun DPS, 4576 Alpha at 4.5 + 13 KM Megathron has more armour histpoints, a bigger drone bay AND does more damage. Count drones into the bargain, the Tempest does 1146 whilst the Megathron does 1309. In short, no imbalance that does not already exist. These rigs would not change the balance of any ships, as it's a fallacy that the balance of a given ship is based upon it's turret/missile slot allotment. Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.23 17:05:00 - [83] Edited by: Goumindong on 23/09/2007 17:06:13 DG Antimatter +20% DPS over antimatter. 2.9% more DPS than Void 1000 units sold in jita ever Domination EMP, +20% dps over EMP. 6% LESS dps than Hail. So you are advantaging the Megathron 2.9% and disadvantaging the Tempest 6%. This accounts for a nearly 10% advantage in DPS to the Megathron that it should not recieve. AND THEN you add in the other autocannon benefits on top of that.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 17:15:00 - [84] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 17:25:30 Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 17:23:55 Megathron still wins. Quote: DG Antimatter +20% DPS over antimatter. 2.9% more DPS than Void 1000 units sold in jita ever Domination EMP, +20% dps over EMP. 6% LESS dps than Hail. So you are advantaging the Megathron 2.9% and disadvantaging the Tempest 6%. This accounts for a nearly 10% advantage in DPS to the Megathron that it should not recieve. Using Void and Hail, from guns alone Megathron puts out 968 (4448 Alpha) and the Tempest 992DPS (3424 Alpha). Include drones, and the Megathron goes up to 1285 whilst the Tempest hits 1202: It still works, especially given that the drawbacks of Hail are far harder on the Tempest than the drabacks on Void are to the Megathron. The Blasters would still have better tracking, and both would have the same effective range. Remember that the Megathron would also have 200 calibration left to play with where the Tempest has only 100. Also remember that we're talking about a Megathron using a T1 rig, compared to the Tempest using a T2 rig. In short, balderdash! The same thing using easily attainable faction ammo: Tempest /w RF EMP vs Megathron /w CN Antimatter Tempest gets 896 + drones for a total of 1106 DPS compared to the Megathron's 952 + drones for a total of 1269 DPS. Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.23 17:36:00 - [85] Edited by: Goumindong on 23/09/2007 17:37:07 You are still using the wrong ammo on the Tempest, the Wrong ammo on the Megathron, ignoring that the tempest still fits with the tech 1 rigs. Ignoring that the Tempest is faster than the Megathron, ignoring that autocannons dont use cap, ignoring that autocannons have much better falloff than blasters. You are ignoring everything important[like the actual dps versus armor of the ships, cap use, falloff, speed of the ship etc] and fudging the numbers to fit your ideal. Its fing ridiculous.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 17:44:00 - [86] Originally by: Goumindong the tempest still fits with 2 of the t1 rigs. You are STILL using the wrong ammo for the Megathron. You are still ignoring all the other benefits of the autocannons. Using two T1 rigs would give you a double penalty to fitting requirements and would consume all your calibration, meaning that each 800mm Repeater would consume 34 CPU and 2183 power with max skills (37 & 2352 with minimum skills). This would mean the guns alone would consume 17464 power. The loadout above without guns consumes 4007 power, and as you would have no calibration left would be to fit an RCU and replace one of your lowslot mods. So which one should go to allow you to do this? Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.23 17:49:00 - [87] Edited by: Goumindong on 23/09/2007 17:51:04 Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Originally by: Goumindong the tempest still fits with 2 of the t1 rigs. You are STILL using the wrong ammo for the Megathron. You are still ignoring all the other benefits of the autocannons. Using two T1 rigs would give you a double penalty to fitting requirements and would consume all your calibration, meaning that each 800mm Repeater would consume 34 CPU and 2183 power with max skills (37 & 2352 with minimum skills). This would mean the guns alone would consume 17464 power. The loadout above without guns consumes 4007 power, and as you would have no calibration left would be to fit an RCU and replace one of your lowslot mods. So which one should go to allow you to do this? Drop the injector. Add more ewar. Drop the plate, switch to tri hard + DC
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 17:57:00 - [88] Quote: Drop the injector. Add more ewar. Drop the plate, switch to tri hard + DC Still doesn't fit, even if you mean to drop BOTH plates. Don't forget the Tempest only has six low slots, which as above are filled with: 2x Gyro 2x 1600 1x EANM 1x DC The only way you can get the guns to fit whilst using two T1 rigs (even with max skills) is by dropping both plates, the cap injector AND the microwarpdrive. Now the Tempest's only advantage over the Megathron is mooted. Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 18:03:00 - [89] Quote: The only way you can get the guns to fit whilst using two T1 rigs (even with max skills) and hardeners is by dropping both plates, the cap injector AND the microwarpdrive. Now the Tempest's only advantage over the Megathron (it's speed) is mooted. My bad. By dropping both plates, it's possible to fit as: 2x Gyro 3x Hard 1x DC 1x 100MN MWD However this would mean that you still have less DPS than the Megathron, and around 62,000 effective hitpoints compared to the near 80,000 the Megathron has (62,232 & 79,699 if you want to be precise). Again, this would mean that the Megathron would toast the Tempest! Hardpoint Rigs
kimish	Posted - 2007.09.23 18:22:00 - [90] would way overpower already way overpowered ships and it would be the new "nos" module, a most have rig.- baad thing _____ _____ "When the moderators are gone, the trolls dances on the table."
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 18:37:00 - [91] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 18:46:15 Quote: You forget that the Tempest does more effective DPS than the Megathron. A lot more. A whole lot more. Droves more. If you're comparing Barrage to Null, sure. If you're comparing faction ammo, it's close but probably. If you're comparing Hail and Void, absolutely not. Quote: The tempest can kill the Megathron RIGHT NOW due to how autocannons work and the change makes the tempest BETTER. In the hands of equally skilled pilots, a neut mega will absolutely annihilate an 800 repeating pest right now. The changes proposed here would narrow the gap considerably, but the Megathron would still pip it to the post. Quote: you only need to drop one 1600rt, but either way, the thron is just totaly outclassed. I understand you can drop one plate and still fit your guns, but with 2x gyro and 1x 1600 you don't have enough slots left for the 3x hard + dc you proposed. If you mean 2x eanm and dc, then the gap narrows - 75k effective on the Tempest compared to 80k effective on the Megathron. However the Megathron could pull the same trick: Remove the RCU and a 1600, replace with an eanm and an overdrive and move the powergrid mod into the rigs (remember your Tempest has no calibration left). Suddenly the Tempest's advantage - it's ability to sit out in it's falloff whilst still dealing damage - is mooted. What's more likely of course is that another magstab or a tracking enhancer would be fitted in that low. Whichever way, the Megathron is coming out on top. There's even enough calibration left after 1x +1 turret rig & 1x ACR to fit a trimark... Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 18:40:00 - [92] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 18:41:35 Quote: would way overpower already way overpowered ships and it would be the new "nos" module, a most have rig. I must say, more fool you if you don't already rig out every ship you fly: They already are essential mods in every single circumstance. I also sincerely doubt that they would be any more valuable than (for example) CCC rigs currently are, as what use is an extra gun if you can't keep it running? Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.23 18:50:00 - [93] Edited by: Goumindong on 23/09/2007 18:51:58 Look this is what your changes will do Here is what this looks like in pure dps. Here is what this looks like under real world conditions. Here is what it looks like right now under real world conditions[800s+ Heavy Missiles(yes, not even Cruise, Siege, or HAMs)] Its frankly ridiculous what you want to do. 8 Turrets used for the Hyrbid in all instances[comparing the Hyperion, megathron does not fare as well]. Tank is standard unmodified armor tank. First graph not using the accurate DPS figures for hit chance which skews the graph in favor of the Hybrids[being farther into falloff]. No falloff rigs were used to compare.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 18:56:00 - [94] Quote: I understand you can drop one plate and still fit your guns, but with 2x gyro and 1x 1600 you don't have enough slots left for the 3x hard + dc you proposed. If you mean 2x eanm and dc, then the gap narrows - 75k effective on the Tempest compared to 80k effective on the Megathron. However the Megathron could pull the same trick: Remove the RCU and a 1600, replace with an eanm and an overdrive and move the powergrid mod into the rigs (remember your Tempest has no calibration left). Suddenly the Tempest's advantage - it's ability to sit out in it's falloff whilst still dealing damage - is mooted. Having run against the profiles for the damage types dealt, the Tempest is looking at 72,000 effective hitpoints and a top speed of 1285m/s compared to that Megathron with 79,000 hitpoints and 1365m/s with the Megathron able to significantly out damage you once it gets in close. Without the cap injector, the Tempest could only run for 1:40 (not enough to kill the mega) whereas the Mega could keep it's speed up to get within range and toast you. All it takes is a smart Megathron pilot. Smart and Gallente may not obviously sit well together, but it does happen... Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 19:04:00 - [95] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 19:07:02 Quote: Its frankly ridiculous what you want to do. 8 Turrets used for the Hyrbid in all instances[comparing the Hyperion, megathron does not fare as well]. Tank is standard unmodified armor tank. First graph not using the accurate DPS figures for hit chance which skews the graph in favor of the Hybrids[being farther into falloff]. No falloff rigs were used to compare. Of course the Hyperion is going to be outclassed by an eight gun Tempest, as it cannot benefit from the supplemental turret rigs. You'd need to use Hybrid rigs to the tune of 300 calibration (at least: you're suggesting the Tempest should run two T1 rigs and so this would be 400 calibration) to get accurate figures when using that ship. If those are falloff rigs then that curve is far less dramatically in favour of the Minmatar. You also suspiciously switched from comparing the Megathron and Tempest to comparing it with the Hyperion instead. Switch back to the Megathron, use up the same calibration as your eight gun Tempest would and come back to the party. If you're right and I'm wrong, so be it - I'm more than man enough to back down from the idea should it be proven to completely imbalance things. As it stands, the evidence given against the proposition simply does not demonstrate this. The Megathron has to be used as the comparable ship, as like the Tempest it gets the twin bonus to it's primary weapon system. Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.23 19:57:00 - [96] Edited by: Goumindong on 23/09/2007 19:56:58 :Psyduck: The megathron with a hybrid rig has the same number of turrets and damage bonuses as the Hyperion without.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 20:43:00 - [97] Quote: The megathron with a hybrid rig has the same number of turrets and damage bonuses as the Hyperion without. It has the same number of damage bonuses, but it also gets a tracking bonus. Unlike the Hyperion, it can benefit from using the supplemental turret rig which is the WHOLE POINT of this thread! Why compare a ship that would not be affected by these rigs to one that would? Neutron Mega /w 2x T1 Ancillary Current Router, 1x T1 Supplemental turret rig: 8x Neutron Blaster Cannon 1x Stasis Web 1x Warp Disruptor 1x Microwarpdrive 1x Cap Injector 1x Damage Control 1x EANM 2x 1600mm RT 1x Tracking Enhancer 2x Magstab This would require a CPU implant to fit, but that's almost a given for any Megathron pilot as it is. With CN Antimatter you're hitting for 952 DPS @ 5.2 + 13KM. With Void it's 968 DPS @ 7.8 + 6.8KM and Null is 760 DPS @ 13 + 16KM. These of course are only gun damage - you'll get an extra 317 DPS from your Ogre II's compared to the maximum drone damage from the Tempest of 210 - and only if the Megathron is using Null where the Tempest is using faction ammo will the Tempest have better tracking than the Megathron. If you wish to demonstrate to me why the Tempest is still better off than the Megathron in this scenario, then please do so. Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.23 23:07:00 - [98] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 23/09/2007 23:07:54 Eight Gun Hyp vs Eight Gun Pest: 8x Neutron Blaster Cannon II /w CN Antimatter 1x Sensor Booster II 1x Stasis Webifier II 1x Warp Disruptor II 1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II 1x 100MN Microwarpdrive II 1x 1600mm Reinforced Steel II 1x Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1x Damage Control II 2x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II 1x Reactor Control Unit II 1x Trimark Armor Pump I 2x Hybrid Ambit Extension I 3x Ogre II 2x Hammerhead II 739/750 CPU 22639.49/22640.63 Power 250/400 Calibration 1204 DPS (Inc drones) at 4.5 /w 16 Falloff & 0.054 Tracking 86,941 Effective HP against EMP 1173m/s 8x 800mm Repeating Artillery /w RF EMP 1x Sensor Booster II 1x Stasis Webifier II 1x Warp Disruptor II 1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II 1x 100MN Microwarpdrive II 1x 1600mm Reinforced Steel II 2x Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II 1x Damage Control II 2x Gyrostabilizer II 2x Supplemental Turret Housing 1 2x Ogre II 2x Hammerhead II 1x Hobgoblin II 635.656/687.5 CPU 19297.6/19375 Power 400/400 Calibration 1106 DPS (Inc drones) at 3 /w 20 Falloff & 0.054 Tracking 72,012 Effective HP against Antimatter 1278m/s If it wasn't evident before, this is why your example of the Hyperion is dishonest. The Megathron gets a tracking bonus, whereas a plated Hyperion is wasting it's second (rep amount) bonus. It's not a suitable comparison. That said, the Hyperion doesn't do a bad job: The Megathron however does it a whole lot better. Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.24 02:55:00 - [99] stop using RF EMP you disingenious twit, start figuring out the actual dps these ships do against armor This is why its unbalanced. Quote: Look this is what your changes will do Here is what this looks like in pure dps. Here is what this looks like under real world conditions. Here is what it looks like right now under real world conditions[800s+ Heavy Missiles(yes, not even Cruise, Siege, or HAMs)] Its frankly ridiculous what you want to do. 8 Turrets used for the Hyrbid in all instances[comparing the Hyperion, megathron does not fare as well]. Tank is standard unmodified armor tank. First graph not using the accurate DPS figures for hit chance which skews the graph in favor of the Hybrids[being farther into falloff]. No falloff rigs were used to compare.
B Glorious	Posted - 2007.09.24 03:43:00 - [100] I'm gonna have to go with the "this would be overpowered" group with this one, especially if the tech 2 one gives +2 turret slots and neither consume all of a ship's available calibration.
Jacque DeCoure	Posted - 2007.09.24 04:20:00 - [101] I like the idea of using Rigs to add an extra hardpoint, I do NOT like the idea of T2 versions giving 2. Why not something like: T1 versions are 200 calibration and give one slot, T2 versions are 150 calibration and give one slot? Anyways, I like the concept - but am not prepared to endorse the idea fully because the real Eve implementation may lead to some serious balance issues - which may require ships to be modified - which could upset some people a LOT.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.24 04:43:00 - [102] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 24/09/2007 04:43:10 Originally by: Goumindong stop using RF EMP you disingenious twit, start figuring out the actual dps these ships do against armor It took me a long whilst to stop laughing at this. Really. I'm comparing both ships when fitted with faction ammo (if you don't like RF EMP, suggest another. You'd probably prefer one with a higher percentage of explosive damage, but of course this would have a lower damage potential...), both ships with close range T2 and also with long range T2. To compare in any other way would be disingenuous. You are still avoiding comparing the Tempest to the Megathron, and I wonder why that is. Could it perhaps be that they are the two comparable ships, and that the Megathron with eight turrets could indeed outdo to an eight gun Tempest? Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.24 04:47:00 - [103] Quote: I'm gonna have to go with the "this would be overpowered" group with this one, especially if the tech 2 one gives +2 turret slots and neither consume all of a ship's available calibration. This is certainly a point on which I am completely flexible. I chose these calibration figures so as to allow the use of two tier one rigs for +2 turrets in the same way that one can use two hybrid/projectile/weapon/missile damage/rof rigs mainly because the addition of these when combined with two weapon upgrades is akin to adding an extra turret or two. I'm certainly not adverse to setting the tech one rig's calibration at 250-300 and the tech two at 350-400 so as to limit their use. The figures I quoted were merely there for the purposes of discussion, and so as to receive feedback such as this. Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.24 04:56:00 - [104] Quote: I like the idea of using Rigs to add an extra hardpoint, I do NOT like the idea of T2 versions giving 2. Why not something like: T1 versions are 200 calibration and give one slot, T2 versions are 150 calibration and give one slot? This would buck the trend for rigs (where the tech two equivalent always gives a better return but at a higher calibration cost), but I'm certainly not adverse to it. The main reason I suggested a +2 rig was that many ships would greatly benefit from having an addition two turrets, and to use the much discussed example of the Megathron vs Tempest, not having a +2 rig would swing the balance heavily in favour of the Megathron. In the example you give, +2 turrets would of course still be possible. With tech one rigs, it would max out your calibration and tech two would leave 100 spare, which wouldn't effectively change how they could be used as per the original suggestion. Quote: Anyways, I like the concept - but am not prepared to endorse the idea fully because the real Eve implementation may lead to some serious balance issues - which may require ships to be modified - which could upset some people a LOT. I would be rather ****ed off myself if CCP decide to bring something like this in and then went around changing all the ships so to restrict the efficacy of such rigs. That said, any time that there's something new or something changes there's always someone who wants to cry about it. "You can please some of the people all of the time or you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time". Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.24 05:04:00 - [105] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos You are still avoiding comparing the Tempest to the Megathron, and I wonder why that is. Could it perhaps be that they are the two comparable ships, and that the Megathron with eight turrets could indeed outdo to an eight gun Tempest? No it cant you bloody moron, the Megathron does the same DPS as the hyperion with 8 turrets, do you see the fing graph, the Tempest outdamages the 8 turret Megathron at ALL RANGES. The Tempest with Barrage nearly outdamages the Megathron with Void at its optimal! The tempest at any amount of falloff just absolutly trounces the megathron, the Tempest does so much more DPS it could fly without drones and STILL do more DPS than the Mega.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.24 05:17:00 - [106] Quote: the Megathron does the same DPS as the hyperion with 8 turrets The Megathron does more effective damage than the Hyperion due to it's tracking bonus. A smart Megathron pilot who is aware that he will never close the gap on the Tempest would then endeavour to increase his transversal, as with any ammo type except Void his tracking is vastly superior to that of the Tempest - and if your Tempest is sitting out in it's falloff, the Megathron's hardly going to try and hit you with Void. If he switches to Null and raises his transversal, he'll be doing more effective damage to you than you can do to him. Quote: the Tempest outdamages the 8 turret Megathron at ALL RANGES. The Tempest with Barrage nearly outdamages the Megathron with Void at its optimal! The graph you linked was for the Hyperion. Tracking makes no difference to effective DPS, right? Quote: The tempest at any amount of falloff just absolutly trounces the megathron, the Tempest does so much more DPS it could fly without drones and STILL do more DPS than the Mega. Falloff rigs. The Megathron +1 can fit some, the Tempest +2 can't, and as such the gap in effective damage can be narrowed in this way. The Megathron also has an extra low slot, so whilst fitting the same tank can add a Tracking Enhancer, increasing it's optimal and narrowing that gap further. With Null, a falloff rig and a Tracking Enhancer, the Megathron is hitting 13KM optimal with an 18KM falloff. The tempest can of course then move further out using Barrage, but doing so would mean moving outside of scram range... Hardpoint Rigs
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.09.24 05:43:00 - [107] Edited by: Goumindong on 24/09/2007 05:43:34 Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos The Megathron does more effective damage than the Hyperion due to it's tracking bonus. A smart Megathron pilot who is aware that he will never close the gap on the Tempest would then endeavour to increase his transversal, as with any ammo type except Void his tracking is vastly superior to that of the Tempest - and if your Tempest is sitting out in it's falloff, the Megathron's hardly going to try and hit you with Void. If he switches to Null and raises his transversal, he'll be doing more effective damage to you than you can do to him. Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. AH ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Quote: The graph you linked was for the Hyperion. Tracking makes no difference to effective DPS, right? Yes and no, against a battleship with a 90% web, its not going to make a difference. The Hyperion also can fit two webs. Its a much better blaster boat than the Megathron. Quote: Falloff rigs. The Megathron +1 can fit some, the Tempest +2 can't, and as such the gap in effective damage can be narrowed in this way. The Megathron also has an extra low slot, so whilst fitting the same tank can add a Tracking Enhancer, increasing it's optimal and narrowing that gap further. With Null, a falloff rig and a Tracking Enhancer, the Megathron is hitting 13KM optimal with an 18KM falloff. The tempest can of course then move further out using Barrage, but doing so would mean moving outside of scram range... Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.09.24 17:52:00 - [108] Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 24/09/2007 17:54:29 Quote: Yes and no, against a battleship with a 90% web, its not going to make a difference. The Hyperion also can fit two webs. Its a much better blaster boat than the Megathron. No ** Sherlock, in the scenario where two battleships are both within range of a 90% web, a Megathron will be doing more damage than the Tempest would. If we're talking faction webs, then it's a different story. As for the Hyperion being a better blaster boat than the Megathron, again you're just not seeing objetively. Right now of course this is true, because the Hyperion has 8 to the Megathron's 7 turrets. Give the Megathron an extra turret, and it becomes a far better blaster boat than the Hyperion is, as long as we're talking plated damage setups. The short of it is you have not yet adequately shown your point, as you keep moving the goalpost - or just evading the issue entirely - whenever it suits you. Quote:** Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. AH ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. It's nice to see you've given up on your point, but of course it's rather obtuse of you to have use the Tempest as an example against the Hyperion in the first place. Next you'll be telling me we should compare the Megathron to the Maelstrom... Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.10.23 21:01:00 - [109] Quote: We currently have rigs to increase the power grid of a ship, and I can only surmise there's a very good reason we don't have rigs to increase a ship's CPU allotment... although it eludes me at present. My proposition however is the addition of a rig that allows you to alter the hi-slot allotment on a given ship. For example: Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 launcher slots Drawback: -10% My reasoning is simple: When I first heard about rigs, I was rather excited - I assumed (incorrectly) that it would allow us much greater flexibility in fitting ships, but instead it's simply given us "OMGWTFBBQPWN" damage setups, unbreakable tanks and oodles of cap. The above would allow us to choose what we want to do with a specific ship's hull, rather than being forced into the same ships time and time again. We could start choosing the ships we like, and not just the bonuses we like. Hardpoint Rigs
Zen Guerrilla Minmatar	Posted - 2007.10.25 10:42:00 - [110] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Quote: Tempest with 8 turret hardpoints? Uhm.. Yes - not to mention a Scorpion, Raven and Typhoon with 6 turrets, and a Megathron and Armageddon with 8. The balance is unaffected simply because all ships are equally capable of using such rigs, so no single race/ship is penalised through their addition. Just because there's a chance for every ship to use such things, doesn't balance the whole concept. There's way more to it than just saying every ship benefits from it. With huge changes like these there would be more to take into account to keep balance. Though i really like the general idea. How about a change to the idea that you could "swap" hardpoints with rigs? Like there was rigs where you could trade a lowslot for a midslot or highslot and vice versa. You get the concept. You could sacrifice a turret for better tanking, a midslot for more damage or whatever you like. I'd like that. ----------------------------- Not an alt. And proud of it.
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.11.30 07:59:00 - [111] Originally by: Zen Guerrilla Just because there's a chance for every ship to use such things, doesn't balance the whole concept. There's way more to it than just saying every ship benefits from it. With huge changes like these there would be more to take into account to keep balance. Of course, you're absolutely right. Again though I'll point out that the +2 Turret rig I proposed would be T2, and we all know how prohibitively expensive they are. What would need to be focused on as far as balance is concerned would be a 7 turret Tempest against an 8 turret Megathron, for example. Quote: Though i really like the general idea. How about a change to the idea that you could "swap" hardpoints with rigs? Like there was rigs where you could trade a lowslot for a midslot or highslot and vice versa. You get the concept. You could sacrifice a turret for better tanking, a midslot for more damage or whatever you like. I'd like that. This idea was proposed early on in the thread, and once I'm finished responding here I'll go back and link the details of it. I do believe there would be more serious balance issues in "swapping" slots, as I feel it is here and with the ship's bonuses that most balancing takes place. However, anything that allows us to make our ships more unique is a good thing in my eyes. As the original post says, I rather hoped that rigs would be a device to enable us greater freedom in the layout of our ships, rather than simply giving us what frankly is just an extra module slot with (generally) inferior statistics to high/mid/low slot items. Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos EP0CH Black Sun Cartel	Posted - 2007.11.30 08:10:00 - [112] As promised: Quote: Linear Power Transformer I This ship modification is designed to increase the low slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 Low slot Drawback: -1 High Slot Linear Power Transformer II This ship modification is designed to increase the low slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 Low slots Drawback: -2 High Slots Switched Mode Power Regulator I This ship modification is designed to increase the mid slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 Mid slot Drawback: -1 High Slot Switched Mode Power Regulator II This ship modification is designed to increase the mid slot allotment at the expense of high slots. Calibration: 300 Bonus: +2 Mid slots Drawback: -2 High slots Of course, I did neglect to look at mid to low slot conversion - with that in mind, here's my own take on that particular bag of worms: Positive Polarity Flux Compression Generator I This ship modification is designed to increase the mid slot allotment at the expense of low slots. Calibration: 200 Bonus: +1 Mid slots Drawback: -1 Low slots Positive Polarity Flux Compression Generator II This ship modification is designed to increase the mid slot allotment at the expense of low slots. Calibration: 300 Bonus: +2 Mid slots Drawback: -2 Low slots Negative Polarity Flux Compression Generator I This ship modification is designed to increase the low slot allotment at the expense of mid slots. Calibration: 200 Bonus: +1 Low slots Drawback: -1 Mid slots Negative Polarity Flux Compression Generator II This ship modification is designed to increase the low slot allotment at the expense of mid slots. Calibration: 200 Bonus: +2 Low slots Drawback: -2 Mid slots Hardpoint Rigs
Camilo Cienfuegos Earned In Blood Divine Retribution Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.04 07:17:00 - [113] Originally by: Camilo Cienfuegos Edited by: Camilo Cienfuegos on 03/09/2007 05:12:37 It's probably been suggested before, but the search didn't return anything useful... Fittings rigs: We currently have rigs to increase the power grid of a ship, and I can only surmise there's a very good reason we don't have rigs to increase a ship's CPU allotment... although it eludes me at present. My proposition however is the addition of a rig that allows you to alter the hi-slot allotment on a given ship. For example: Supplemental Turret Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 turret slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Turret Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's turret fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 turret slots Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing I This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 200 Bonus: +1 launcher slot Drawback: -10% Supplemental Launcher Housing II This ship modification is designed to increase a ship's launcher fitting capabilities at the expense of power/CPU use. Calibration Cost: 300 Bonus: +2 launcher slots Drawback: -10% My reasoning is simple: When I first heard about rigs, I was rather excited - I assumed (incorrectly) that it would allow us much greater flexibility in fitting ships, but instead it's simply given us "OMGWTFBBQPWN" damage setups, unbreakable tanks and oodles of cap. The above would allow us to choose what we want to do with a specific ship's hull, rather than being forced into the same ships time and time again. We could start choosing the ships we like, and not just the bonuses we like. For those of you who aren't as strange as I and who don't want to fly a fully missile fitted Vengeance, what about squeezing that extra turret onto a Megathron? Giving the Cerberus a full rack of HAMs? Turning the Vagabond into a missile boat from hell? How about a proper Battle Badger, with a pair of Assault Missile launchers? (My figures may not be perfect - please only criticise them if you have another suggestion. Otherwise, flame at will) Hardpoint Rigs
Eleana Tomelac Gallente Through the Looking Glass	Posted - 2008.01.31 12:36:00 - [114] Wouldn't a rig taking a missile slot and giving a turret slot at the expense of turret powergrid and a slot taking a turret slot and giving a missile slot at the expense of CPU would be good? Missile to turret hardpoint converter I This ship modification is designed to replace a ship's missile hardpoint with a turret hardpoint at the expense of powergrid. Calibration Cost: 250 Bonus: +1 turret slot Malus : -1 missile slot Drawback: -10% Turret to missile hardpoint converter I This ship modification is designed to replace a ship's turret hardpoint with a missile hardpoint at the expense of CPU. Calibration Cost: 250 Bonus: +1 turret slot Malus : -1 missile slot Drawback: -10% Why replacing and not just adding a hardpoint? Just look at a deimos or a zealot, it would just be too big, you would fit one class smaller turrets and have one more turret, it's just an enormous potential. Now look at ships that could fit both type, this is converting an unbonused slot to a bonused slot at the expense of the thing you need most to fit it (same philosophy as weapon rigs). So, what we get at the end? No boost to drake, as mentionned above it could be bad... Boost in prophecy firepower, but it was already a tight fit in mine, it hard to make good use of the turret. Ferox boost, just choose, missile or turret boat fits your needs? it has 5/5 and 7 hi. Yest iy could be 7 fairly small turrets... Nothing for the already high power harbinger. No change in gallente BCs. But a general boost in minmatar which could make minmatar FOTM with theyr double bonus and more turrets to hurricane, tempest, rupture and all BS! It does not fix the issue with too high raven firepower boost that existed with the 'just adding one turret' rigs proposed before. I didn't list all affected ships, but it could be an issue. Maybe 250 calibration can forbid more than one of this modification? -- Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast ! Assault Frigates MK II
Camilo Cienfuegos Earned In Blood	Posted - 2008.02.02 06:45:00 - [115] Originally by: Eleana Tomelac Wouldn't a rig taking a missile slot and giving a turret slot at the expense of turret powergrid and a slot taking a turret slot and giving a missile slot at the expense of CPU would be good? Yes, it would. My own suggestion was to increase power grid and cpu consumption (whichever is most restrictive per weapon type and ship that receives bonuses to it, perhaps even both) modified by the appropriate rigging skill. Quote: Missile to turret hardpoint converter I This ship modification is designed to replace a ship's missile hardpoint with a turret hardpoint at the expense of powergrid. Calibration Cost: 250 Bonus: +1 turret slot Malus : -1 missile slot Drawback: -10% Turret to missile hardpoint converter I This ship modification is designed to replace a ship's turret hardpoint with a missile hardpoint at the expense of CPU. Calibration Cost: 250 Bonus: +1 turret slot Malus : -1 missile slot Drawback: -10% This is very similar to my own suggestion with the exception that it designates specific resources to be restricted, has a slightly increased calibration cost and instead of increasing the consumption of the modules to be fitted, it reduces the ship's own output. I think given that current rigs all modify the fittings and not the ships that it may be difficult to implement, but I would support such an idea. I would like to see +2 turret or missile rigs myself, but I do understand why people feel this might be a tad imbalanced. I disagree, but that's my perogative Quote: Why replacing and not just adding a hardpoint? Again, this is based on my assumptions of how eve is designed. I assume that ship information is stored in tabular format, and that the ship tables contain information such as the number of missile or turret slots along with resistances, base armor/shield/hull and so on. I assume that modifying the number of hardpoints would be more time consuming than simply "swapping" them, and as such avoided this issue. It could also create lots of other balance issues, but again the idea is intruiging. Now look at ships that could fit both type, this is converting an unbonused slot to a bonused slot at the expense of the thing you need most to fit it (same philosophy as weapon rigs). So, what we get at the end? Quote: No boost to drake Whilst the Drake would struggle, it could fit an extra launcher on using these rigs and as such could benefit. Quote: But a general boost in minmatar which could make minmatar FOTM with theyr double bonus and more turrets to hurricane, tempest, rupture and all BS! Yes, minmatar are the difficult one with their split setups, but bear in mind that their battleships have some split bonuses too. Ships like the Hurricane shouldn't benefit that much, especially if as you and others suggested only +1 rigs are introduced. The balance is down to CCP, but I'm glad that this topic is receiving some feedback. Hardpoint Rigs
DrDooma	Posted - 2008.02.02 10:02:00 - [116] Without doing 2 much calculations, the only problem I see is with some BCs and BSs size ships. I think you on the right track but i love what Galdaron xax suggested as long as it does not apply to T2 ships. Originally by: Galdaron xax how about interchanging slots ?? a low slot for a med slot a high slot for a med slot or a low slot. and so on.I know most will take high slots or low slots depending the ship.A hauler with 7 low slots anybody ?? just an idea but this would also mean ppl will loose the idea of combat abilieties of ships and are no longer able to predict battle actions.It would make a ship scanner very valuable at that point :)
Camilo Cienfuegos Earned In Blood	Posted - 2008.02.02 20:33:00 - [117] Quote: how about interchanging slots ?? a low slot for a med slot a high slot for a med slot or a low slot. and so on.I know most will take high slots or low slots depending the ship.A hauler with 7 low slots anybody ?? This is an idea I have always felt should be part of the ship design stage: It would be an awful lot of work, but let's say when you put a Bestower blueprint into the manufacturing slot, a dialog appears that allows you to select where you would like those slots to go within preset parameters. The Bestower currently has ten slots, and I feel the best implementation of the idea quoted above would be to allow ship builders to designate where those slots go, allowing for a minimum of one slot in each rack and a maximum of eight. Such ships would require sweeping changes to the market system (or perhaps could only be sold on contracts), and would require lots more database real estate - however, given that there are still only a specific number of combinations possible on each ship based on the overall number of slots they are allowed, it's certainly doable. I do however think that rigging isn't really the way to go for such an idea. Hardpoint Rigs

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.