EVE Search - Scripts and how they will affect modules

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Scripts and how they will affect modules

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 10 post(s)
Veng3ance Prophets Of a Damned Universe	Posted - 2007.11.01 14:26:00 - [61] Originally by: bldyannoyed While i can understand how this change can will positively affect many aspects of the game, there are, as usual, some ships which will simply be nerfed by this. Muninn. Designed primarily an an artillery boat. Only 3 mids. Will require 2 sensor boosters on range mode to be able to lock up to its own optimal and 1 tracking comp on optimal to be able to gets its range out to anything really usefull. Result is that ship that only functions well as a fast alpha strike boat can no longer achieve a fast alpha strike. Eagle- A ship with a long and well documented list of problems will no longer be able to achieve long range AND good tracking, about the only thing that anyone can agree it does reasonably well. How is a Tempest, which once loading a 1400II with Tremor has tracking comparable to a Dreadnought supposed to funtion if it can essentially only choose range OR tracking? Exactly right Bldy. And lets not forget my poor Geddon
Stellar Vix State War Academy	Posted - 2007.11.01 14:43:00 - [62] Any plans for a hot key swap of script? might be also used for guns with ammo as well. also are we going to see any other various other scripts other than the +100% -100% layout? like a 125+ bonus and -125 bonus effect in any future plans or are you guys just going to do this for now and see where it goes? Also are weapon/missile/mining/ewar upgrades on the list of things to script next? SWA PVP
Iva Soreass FireStar Inc	Posted - 2007.11.01 14:44:00 - [63] Edited by: Iva Soreass on 01/11/2007 14:44:27 While damps i aggree this change will make a tiny differance (and im a arazu flyer) the scripts for sensor boosters is just stupid. Why the heck are you nerfing SB's like this ? [20:03:51] Ciprian > no pls i have snakes www.firestar-online.com

CCP Gangleri	Posted - 2007.11.01 14:56:00 - [64] Scripts have now been seeded on the market in FD-MLJ, do not buy more than you need, I WILL ban from Sisi anyone that buys more than a reasonable amount of each type. Please keep posting constructive feedback here and reporting any bugs you may find using the bug reporting system.

Natalie Jax Indecision Industries	Posted - 2007.11.01 15:04:00 - [65] I can't see the stats at the moment, but earlier it was showing that they were showing that RSD's were getting an additional nerf such that even the "scripted" effect was lower than it is now. Please, at least, don't double-nerf the module all at once. Check balance after the first go. Also, please address the lag issue. Even if it's only a one-second reload time that results in a series of three commands that have to be relayed. One to stop the module, one to change the script, and another to reactivate it. Any minor lag or desync and that module's ineffective for a good long time. Kinda makes the very idea of switching scripts on the fly extremely unappealing. Currently, Overloading a module is a toggle that doesn't require the module to shut off to take effect. I'd be far happier if this could be similar, allowing you to change the scrip "between" cycles instantly.
Nian Banks Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir	Posted - 2007.11.01 15:25:00 - [66] Originally by: CCP Gangleri Scripts have now been seeded on the market in FD-MLJ, do not buy more than you need, I WILL ban from Sisi anyone that buys more than a reasonable amount of each type. Please keep posting constructive feedback here and reporting any bugs you may find using the bug reporting system. Sorry I can't think of anything constructive, Your nerfing minmatar to the stone age. Ta. If you want to do something constructive though, how about increasing all minmatar ships targeting range by 20%
Leandro Salazar The Blackguard Wolves Knights Of the Southerncross	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:26:00 - [67] So basically you guys cut the efficiency of TCs, a perfectly fine module currently, in half? And you expect constructive feedback on this totally insane idea? Well, here is some: STOP IT! Seriously, I understand the need for this on overpowered stuff like RSDs, but TCs? If anything, those things are underpowered already, and they get a horribly harsh nerf on top of that? If scripts really do -100%/+100%, then why not just keep the old base values on non-overpowered modules? There is no 'n' in turret There is no 'r' in faction There is no 'a' in Scorpion There is no 'e' in Caldari There is no makeup in rogue drones
Phaedruss	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:27:00 - [68] Well...on rough calculation, with 3 best named damps, a damp rig, lev 4 signal suppression skill, and targeting range scripts inserted, the best I can damp against a 90km targeting range i.e. a NON-sensor boosted raven with lev 4 long range targeting, is a little more than 24km. Not even inside T2 warp disruptor range. That pretty much amounts to 3 mid slots, a rig, training and 3 modules that are a complete waste of time for most uses I'd bother putting them to. Nice
Nian Banks Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:34:00 - [69] Actually sorry I do have a constructive request for rebalancing. I did a little checking of the Targeting Range v's Scan Resolution per race, ofcourse we all know that it goes like this.. Greatest Targeting range<-- Caldari - Gallente - Amarr - Minmatar -->Greatest Scan Resolution Checking these stats on several ship classes based on tiers I notice that the % difference for some ship classes is inconsistent except for the Tier3 Battleships (Thought the Tier3 Gallante BS has a low targeting range and high sensor strength, clearly the odd one out as its a blaster boat). Other classes are a little askew, Tier1 battlecruisers have a 15km (45km-60km) targeting range difference from worst to best, however when it comes to scan resolution it is only a 25mm difference (195mm-220mm), the percentage difference for this is quite minor in comparison to the % difference of targeting ranges. A similar disparity can be seen from destroyers, 9km difference (27km-36km) but only 75mm difference (475mm-550mm) Perthaps before this patch goes through, we can have the % difference from the different classes for each race balanced to have the same % difference for targeting range and scan resolution. Remember that the bonuses given from sensor boosters are the same for the bonuses. Basically put, Minmatar and Amarr should have a clear even advantage over the Galente and Caldari for scan resolution however the opposite for Targeting Range. I have not checked the tracking and optimal+falloff between races but I would hope that those also show a clear % difference.
Veng3ance Prophets Of a Damned Universe	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:42:00 - [70] I just wanted to add one more thing. What were you guys thinking nerfing Tracking Disruptors? The things only work on some ships and ontop of that they hardly even affect most turret boats to the point that they can't actually hit you. This nerf was meant for sensor damps! Stop throwing it on other modules just because you can!
Borasao	Posted - 2007.11.01 17:45:00 - [71] Can you use the module without a script to get a little from both? or must it have a script loaded and be all one or the other?
Talsha Talamar Amarr Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa	Posted - 2007.11.01 18:10:00 - [72] Edited by: Talsha Talamar on 01/11/2007 18:13:55 Edited by: Talsha Talamar on 01/11/2007 18:13:41 Edited by: Talsha Talamar on 01/11/2007 18:10:49 This change seems more radical than I assumed it to be. Actually in this form I do not understand the reasoning behind the Tracking Computer change and I am a bit confused by this harsh reduction of Tracking Disruptor efficiency. The boni of Sensor Boosters and Sensor Dampeners, were to high simply because of their universal usability. Tracking Disruptors are of use only against a specific type of ships, namely those employing turrets, and even then only of maximum effectiveness against a subclass of these ships, namely those employing weapons relying on the optimal range. Tracking Disruptors are also of use primarily for a specific type of ship, those fast and agile enough to orbit with high transversal velocities. Some of these ships actually have to rely heavily on Tracking Disruptor effects to be effective at all. The Curse and Arbitrator to name two of them. The clicks to change the scripts, which add to the overhead time required for micromanaging, thus increasing the chance for errors, in combination with the potential negative effect of lag on the reload, as well as the still overall reduced efficiency of the TD modules, will heavily impact on the survivability of these ships. Originally I had hoped that the scripts would negate one bonus, while boosting the other by a minor margin to partly offset the loss of the first. So in my eyes as far as tracking disruptors are concerned, the changes are not needed, and to unbalanced in a negative way. It might be prudent to look into adjusting the boni on ships effected by this change, and/or into adding other versatility by introducing scripts t hat for example reduce falloff, not optimal range as was mentioned before. So far my first impression. I will test the actual effects a bit and come back to it ;)
Nizdaar Gallente STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2007.11.01 18:50:00 - [73] The scripts themselves seem to be performing the way you have intended in both RSD bonus ships and non RSD bonus ships. However they seem badly nerfed even with scripts. -48.875% to resolution or targetting range with a script loaded in a Keres with signal suppression 3? That's significantly less than what I get on tranquility right now. Why not increase the bonuses of the RSD specific ships? A 5% bonus per skill level just doesn't seem to set them apart enough. I didn't think the problem was so much the RSD ships but that everyone was fitting RSDs just like multispec jammers of old. It would also be nice to see BPOs for the scripts seeded. The less stuff I need to try and ferry down to 0.0 on a continual basis the better.
PC5 Bermuda Syndrome	Posted - 2007.11.01 19:59:00 - [74] Edited by: PC5 on 01/11/2007 20:06:35 Is it really necessary to put those basic scripts into market? Why are you generating more 'items' and more lag ingame? Why not implement their basic (lets say tech 1) functions into modules already and let player chose from their two basic functions? I understand that maybe CCP wants to make new scripts for those modules in future but basic functions are basic and those new (future ones) can be bought from market and loaded into module when needed. I just dont like that part where i have to put new items into my cargo bay (scripts in cargo bay? wtf?) and dont forget about x things before undocking for 1-2 minutes fight. I would like to get more fun from fight than buying stuff and preparing. Anyway i see here some new solutions for game in future. Will i have to start worry that i forgoten to load (or buy) x scripts into my ship in future? Well maybe there will be new ingame NPC corp selling software for... modules, maybe even whole ships? Well i hope it wont end like this : Notify : Access denied - your toilet is not programmed with any usage script. or Notify : your toilet is operating at 50% of its capacity, expect nasty smell. Load proper script for better usage and specialization. PS. Sorry for my english.
Natalie Jax Indecision Industries	Posted - 2007.11.01 20:59:00 - [75] Y'all are really going overboard with the nerfbat here. If the numbers I've been seeing are correct then not even the specialized ships will be able to use RSD's effectively anymore. So much for the "need for speed" initiative with ill-conceived crap like this going in. I'm usually not a negative person, but you're overnerfing modules that do need a tweak and irrationally nerfing modules that are ineffective as they are now.
Ariel Darklight Caldari Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.11.01 21:34:00 - [76] I've just tested the new scripts on my arazu and noticed a 20% decrease in range strength when using the range script compared to tranquility with 0 effect on sensor resolution. Someone can just mwd up to your arazu and insta-pop it now... sweet. I'm afraid to try out tracking disruptor scripts on my already nerfed pilgrim since they hardly worked in the first place. Both the ships are essentially dead if the there is no boost to either ship when the scripts are released. Don't even bother undocking with them.
Trishan Green Men Incorporated	Posted - 2007.11.01 23:15:00 - [77] Originally by: Natalie Jax Please construct a script for Falloff-Range Disruption sooner rather than later. Don't you find it strange that the race with the bonuses to Tracking Disruptors (Amarr) is the least useful versus their enemy faction (Minmatar)? Boooooooooh rattles chains Boooooooo activates target painter scaaaaaary
RexWolf Caldari Hull and Shields	Posted - 2007.11.02 00:10:00 - [78] Maybe these scripts should be changed into "data crystals" or "computer crystals"? Just a thought.
Phaedruss	Posted - 2007.11.02 01:57:00 - [79] Originally by: Talsha Talamar Tracking Disruptors are of use only against a specific type of ships, namely those employing turrets, and even then only of maximum effectiveness against a subclass of these ships, namely those employing weapons relying on the optimal range. Tracking Disruptors are also of use primarily for a specific type of ship, those fast and agile enough to orbit with high transversal velocities. Some of these ships actually have to rely heavily on Tracking Disruptor effects to be effective at all. The Curse and Arbitrator to name two of them. Don't worry about it...Crows, Flycatchers, Caracals, Cerberus, Sacrilege, Drakes, Ravens, Nighthawks. Does anyone actually fly them these days?
Futher Bezluden Minmatar ORIGIN SYSTEMS Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.02 04:07:00 - [80] I'm loving the scripts for Damps and Tracking Disruptors. Cyclone with Signal Suppression 4, Turret Destabilization 2 (will get to 4 ) RSD II's: -40.8 to lock range with 1 script, -40.8% scan res with the other. Sensor Booster II: range script, 60% range bonus. Sensor Booster II: scan-res script, 60% scan-res bonus. Signal Amp II: 20% target range bonus, 15% scan-res bonus. TD II's: -44.2 to turret optimal with range dis script, -44.2 to turret tracking with the other script. Tracking Comp II: optimal range script, 15% optimal range bonus. Tracking Comp II: tracking script, 30% tracking speed. Tracking Enhancer II: 1.15x range, 1.095x tracking. Tracking Link II: optimal range script, 15% optimal range bonus. Tracking Link II: tracking script, 30% tracking speed. CCP, this is a wonderfully ineffective change made. Congrats, this will let me keep my damp and TD cyclones, maelstroms, and solve little. THUKKER -Be Paranoid Skeet Skeet L33t
Moraguth Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.11.02 05:42:00 - [81] Instead of getting mad about this nerf; And it is a nerf, to every module listed, even though quite a few of them have ABSOLUTELY NO NEED TO BE NERFED WTFBBQFISHSTICKS.... ahem, not getting mad. Instead I realize that these changes only accomplish 2 things. 1, give blobs one more thing to think about asking their members (do we care about telling this half to use this script and that half to use the other one so we can make their carriers useless? nah, okay. they be good enough regardless). 2, make blobs bigger. Now it requires twice as many mid slots to have the same effect as before. Therefore, the easy answer is, bring more people. Sure, the small scale PvP will be more fun and crazy, but that kinda pvp doesn't really do anything in the over-all landscape of the game. The blobs will have to be bigger to compensate, and that means more omg-lag-crazy-super-fun-time. I'm excited. On a nicer note (kind of), I really don't see the need to do this to tracking computers, and i don't see why this isn't being done to the low slot modules that affect the same stats. Could we add scripts for cloaking modules? Nanofibers? good game
Graalum Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.11.02 05:55:00 - [82] im sorry, but what is the point of this again? What do we gain, besides another pain in the ass?
Gut Punch The Graduates Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2007.11.02 07:26:00 - [83] How does making ECM half as effect result in decreasing the number of ships required in a fleet fight? Doesn't this make need for bigger blobs to fill in the new EW holes? What about recon pilots? The Arazu is completely built around the EW tank. You need to have both RSD attributes to max power because just being able to damp range or lock time isn't enough to protect the ship; expecially when you are engaging more than one target. Can recons get some sort of ability which brings back some of the second EW attribute? --- --- Brutally Clever Empire ---
Yukisa	Posted - 2007.11.02 07:28:00 - [84] Gangleri: can you look into what affect this will have for fleet Armageddons or Apoc and Abaddon? Armarr suffer from lack of mids. Armarr ships have 1 wasted bonus. Gallente have 2 bonuses, with the mega having useful tracking boost built into it. Those ships do not need the extra tracking mods provide, they can simply use the optimal range script. Likewise, the Rohk can simply use the tracking script since its got a great optimal already. Now put these changes of yours and fit out fleet setups for armarr ships. You simply can't do it with the geddon's 3 mids and retain useful engagement range or tracking. Please note it already needs 2 RCU II in the lows to equip tachyons already. It can't afford to waste anymore lows on tracking enhancers. Seriously you need to look deeper into what your proposed changes will do across the board. There's already enough gallente/caldari ships in pvp as it is and armarr are sorely lacking. Why make a change that will hurt them more?
Khan Soriano Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2007.11.02 10:36:00 - [85] I like this change, it will certainly make it easier to balance things out. Good job Gangleri!! One thing I want to see with Warp Disruption Field is being able to use it in low-sec with the ability to scramble one target (just like the description says) As it is right now on SISI, with script loaded its not preventing anyone from warping out. Please don't make this module (+script) anti-capital only, it wouldn't be overpowered in any way but would give all Heavy Interdictors flexibility in their setups. ----- Arbitrator - Life & Death Once Amarr, now thanks to balance team going Minmatar
Zirator Times of Ancar Pure.	Posted - 2007.11.02 11:24:00 - [86] Well after playing around with them a bit yesterday on test server I have a request. Please insert another script that is only useable by reconships and that gives a bonus to both attributes of the module. IE A script for sensor dampeners that can only be used by Lachesis and Arazu A script for tracking disruptor that can only be used by the Pilgrim and the Curse. Cause now these ships are nerfed to hell and back.
Phaedruss	Posted - 2007.11.02 11:53:00 - [87] Originally by: Zirator A script for sensor dampeners that can only be used by Lachesis and Arazu A script for tracking disruptor that can only be used by the Pilgrim and the Curse. Cause now these ships are nerfed to hell and back. They sure are. Sensor Booster II increases targeting range or scan resolution by 60% with scripts, and all you need are the skills to fit them. Sensor Damp II gives a penalty to targeting range or scan resolution of 34% unskilled. Add a damp rig (which has also been nerfed to 5% increase in effectiveness) and Level 4 Signal Suppression and you have -42.84 Penalty. So, the Eve Universe has been turned upside down and EW sent back into the dark ages on SISI. Look at the situation now between Sensor Boosters and damps on Tranquility and compare that to: 60% bonus with Boosters (unskilled) and -42.84% penalty with Damps (skilled with rig). What are you people thinking?
LUH 3471	Posted - 2007.11.02 12:52:00 - [88] ccp you nerfed ew way to much and made it all more complicated at the same time how about u nerf all ew modules alittle bit less and give recons better bonus leave out the scripts its all complicated enough already for you and for us
El'essar Viocragh Minmatar FSK23	Posted - 2007.11.02 13:03:00 - [89] Originally by: Phaedruss Originally by: Zirator A script for sensor dampeners that can only be used by Lachesis and Arazu A script for tracking disruptor that can only be used by the Pilgrim and the Curse. Cause now these ships are nerfed to hell and back. They sure are. Sensor Booster II increases targeting range or scan resolution by 60% with scripts, and all you need are the skills to fit them. Sensor Damp II gives a penalty to targeting range or scan resolution of 34% unskilled. Add a damp rig (which has also been nerfed to 5% increase in effectiveness) and Level 4 Signal Suppression and you have -42.84 Penalty. So, the Eve Universe has been turned upside down and EW sent back into the dark ages on SISI. Look at the situation now between Sensor Boosters and damps on Tranquility and compare that to: 60% bonus with Boosters (unskilled) and -42.84% penalty with Damps (skilled with rig). What are you people thinking? That you have no clue about math? 20 * 0.5716 * 1.6 = 18.2912 and therefor bonused ships or ships that sacrifice a rigslot for EW still have an edge if you put a few SP in it, but in other cases a SBII is now a viable counter to a RSDII. Read here for a bit of pre-nerf math. Come again if you really think that 4+ SB II are an adequate counter to ONE RSD II on a bonused RSD ship with max skills. And that two RSD II on a bonused ship cannot even be countered by a Scorpion with 8 SB II. Until then, stop spreading lies. -- [17:47] <Mephysto> its dead, jim
Phaedruss	Posted - 2007.11.02 13:23:00 - [90] Originally by: El'essar Viocragh Originally by: Phaedruss Originally by: Zirator A script for sensor dampeners that can only be used by Lachesis and Arazu A script for tracking disruptor that can only be used by the Pilgrim and the Curse. Cause now these ships are nerfed to hell and back. They sure are. Sensor Booster II increases targeting range or scan resolution by 60% with scripts, and all you need are the skills to fit them. Sensor Damp II gives a penalty to targeting range or scan resolution of 34% unskilled. Add a damp rig (which has also been nerfed to 5% increase in effectiveness) and Level 4 Signal Suppression and you have -42.84 Penalty. So, the Eve Universe has been turned upside down and EW sent back into the dark ages on SISI. Look at the situation now between Sensor Boosters and damps on Tranquility and compare that to: 60% bonus with Boosters (unskilled) and -42.84% penalty with Damps (skilled with rig). What are you people thinking? That you have no clue about math? 20 * 0.5716 * 1.6 = 18.2912 and therefor bonused ships or ships that sacrifice a rigslot for EW still have an edge if you put a few SP in it, but in other cases a SBII is now a viable counter to a RSDII. Read here for a bit of pre-nerf math. Come again if you really think that 4+ SB II are an adequate counter to ONE RSD II on a bonused RSD ship with max skills. And that two RSD II on a bonused ship cannot even be countered by a Scorpion with 8 SB II. Until then, stop spreading lies. Lies? How about you jump on SISI and take a look for yourself. i'm LOOKING at the module with the skills and rig right now.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.