These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Ancillary MicroWarpdrive

Author
Lidia Caderu
Zero To High
Worst Alliance Ever
#1 - 2013-07-31 18:14:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Lidia Caderu
Because just a Microwarpdrive is too mainstreem

MWD simply breaks Active tanking so ancillary MWD is what we need, I think :))))

It have not to give negative bonus to cap but battary injection might use some cap (or might not)
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#2 - 2013-07-31 18:19:20 UTC
So youre asking for a charge based prop mod that uses no cap and has negative cap effect? Well ****, why don't we just allow as many of these as youd like to fit while were at it with no stacking penalty!

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Lidia Caderu
Zero To High
Worst Alliance Ever
#3 - 2013-07-31 18:29:01 UTC
yeap, why not?
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#4 - 2013-07-31 18:37:55 UTC
The ancillary concept was a mistake with the ASB and any module that works like it would be a mistake also.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-07-31 18:50:08 UTC
Lidia Caderu wrote:
yeap, why not?



Because this was possible already at some point in the game and was stupidly OP.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne

Lidia Caderu
Zero To High
Worst Alliance Ever
#6 - 2013-07-31 19:00:49 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Lidia Caderu wrote:
yeap, why not?



Because this was possible already at some point in the game and was stupidly OP.




Explain please.
Mr Doctor
Sex Machineguns
#7 - 2013-07-31 19:07:07 UTC
They should bring back MWD stacking, just with heavy stacking bonuses and major agility multiplier when active.
Jureth22
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2013-07-31 19:07:34 UTC
how about anciliary weapons?anciliar cap booster that uses cap boosters to boost the cap booster.sky is the limit
stoicfaux
#9 - 2013-07-31 19:14:31 UTC
I like it. It's still wrong because two-in-one-modules can turn dangerously unbalanced pretty quickly.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Mascha Tzash
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2013-07-31 19:15:55 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The ancillary concept was a mistake with the ASB and any module that works like it would be a mistake also.


In that wake I'm still in search of a RL-Ancillary Coffe Maker. For the taste of fresh brewed coffee on the commute (and the envyous looks of the others on the train).

On Topic:
Cap has its use and sense. And if the number of modules that suck it dry is too high there is a reason for it. There can't be the jack of all trades (tank, dmg and speed) in combination with master of all. It would be game breaking. Every fit has flaws and cap is a limit that helps show them.
Whitehound
#11 - 2013-07-31 19:24:32 UTC
How about an Ancillary Energy Vampire? It produces cap charges!

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#12 - 2013-07-31 21:10:55 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
How about an Ancillary Energy Vampire? It produces cap charges!

Nice! Big smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#13 - 2013-07-31 21:15:39 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
How about an Ancillary Energy Vampire? It produces cap charges!


But it must produce the cap charges directly into anything that uses the cap charges so you never have to reload your ASB with this active.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#14 - 2013-07-31 21:15:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Hmmm, suggestions were asked for concerning multipurpose modules.

Consider a Dual Purpose Ancillary MWD.

It functions as a T1 basic MWD normally, but contains cap charges that can be expended to produce a Micro Jump like a Micro Jump drive. You can jump without charges but it drain most all of your capacitor to do so. Obviously restricted to BS class for now. Alternatively you could fuel it with Liquid Oxygen or an isotope... or possibly even Strontium... if you wanted to get away from cap charge use.

The question would be how the "cool down" period would be handled. Would it prevent jumps only until the timer was over, or would the module not function at all until that time.

Just an idle thought.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Whitehound
#15 - 2013-07-31 21:18:43 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
How about an Ancillary Energy Vampire? It produces cap charges!


But it must produce the cap charges directly into anything that uses the cap charges so you never have to reload your ASB with this active.

Wait, what? No! I want to vampire NPCs, fill up my cargohold with cap charges and reprocess them into minerals. It will be the new way of mining!

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#16 - 2013-07-31 21:22:09 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Whitehound wrote:
How about an Ancillary Energy Vampire? It produces cap charges!


But it must produce the cap charges directly into anything that uses the cap charges so you never have to reload your ASB with this active.

Wait, what? No! I want to vampire NPCs, fill up my cargohold with cap charges and reprocess them into minerals. It will be the new way of mining!

Or leave them intact for resale, starting a cap charge black market.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#17 - 2013-07-31 22:09:35 UTC
Mascha Tzash wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The ancillary concept was a mistake with the ASB and any module that works like it would be a mistake also.


In that wake I'm still in search of a RL-Ancillary Coffe Maker. For the taste of fresh brewed coffee on the commute (and the envyous looks of the others on the train).

Ancillary Coffee Maker
It has several types of charges, they range from Caf Boosers 75~150 reference here

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Zetak
State War Academy
Caldari State
#18 - 2013-08-01 07:27:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Zetak
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The ancillary concept was a mistake with the ASB and any module that works like it would be a mistake also.


It was not a mistake. Before ancillary shield boosters, you had to buy the 400-500 mil shield booster for missioning, or use a very specialized fit. In pvp with the exception of some cases, shield tanking was inferior to armor tanking, still is in a lot of cases, but not as much. If you say other, you are wrong.
With ancillary shield booster I use a med booster II, it cost me 2 mil isk, and i can tank everything without the fear of dying, and I remain cap stable. An ancillary MWD is one of the better ideas, because when slots are few, and your cap is bad, an ancillary can help very much.

Caldari ships for example does not have the luxury of having a good cap, and usually med slots are taken by the tank or tackle/ewar modules. An ancillary module limited as they are (8 cycle before reload), it gives extra modules to fit, meaning you don't have to fit cap booster if you use it with ASB, and there is more room for more useful ewar modules.

I bet that those who oppose ancillary are all armor tankers, who are disappointed that ancillary armor rep is not good, and ancillary shield tankers have a better fighting chance.
Whitehound
#19 - 2013-08-01 09:02:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Zetak wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The ancillary concept was a mistake with the ASB and any module that works like it would be a mistake also.


It was not a mistake. Before ancillary shield boosters, you had to buy the 400-500 mil shield booster for missioning, or use a very specialized fit. In pvp with the exception of some cases, shield tanking was inferior to armor tanking, still is in a lot of cases, but not as much. If you say other, you are wrong.
With ancillary shield booster I use a med booster II, it cost me 2 mil isk, and i can tank everything without the fear of dying, and I remain cap stable. An ancillary MWD is one of the better ideas, because when slots are few, and your cap is bad, an ancillary can help very much.

Caldari ships for example does not have the luxury of having a good cap, and usually med slots are taken by the tank or tackle/ewar modules. An ancillary module limited as they are (8 cycle before reload), it gives extra modules to fit, meaning you don't have to fit cap booster if you use it with ASB, and there is more room for more useful ewar modules.

I bet that those who oppose ancillary are all armor tankers, who are disappointed that ancillary armor rep is not good, and ancillary shield tankers have a better fighting chance.

Only to add to it, the way I see it is as follows.

Before could an armor tanker fit a full tank into the low-slots and a cap booster into the mid-slots. This allows to run an armor tank for a long time while it also allows to produce enough cap for everything else such as MWD, weapons, etc.. A shield tanker could not produce cap in this way, because it would cost one mid-slot of the shield tank and there is only the cap power relay for the low-slots in order to produce more cap, which penalizes shield boosters (ignoring cap flux coils as they seem to be useless).

With the ASB can shield tankers use cap charges like an armor tanker could before the ASBs got introduced. And with the AAR can armor tankers now repair their tank in a similar way by boosting the repair rate with nanite paste.

In short, it seems to be balanced and I can see no mistake.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#20 - 2013-08-01 09:11:19 UTC
Zetak wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
The ancillary concept was a mistake with the ASB and any module that works like it would be a mistake also.


It was not a mistake. Before ancillary shield boosters, you had to buy the 400-500 mil shield booster for missioning, or use a very specialized fit. In pvp with the exception of some cases, shield tanking was inferior to armor tanking, still is in a lot of cases, but not as much. If you say other, you are wrong.


i disagree strongly here. why are faction/dead space/officer armor reps hardly sold? because they suck big donkey balls and why are faction/dead space/officer shield mods expensive and sold a lot? because they rule new eden

it isnt said that armor tanking is all bad it has it has strong points for sure but so does shield, and can be very effective it just depends on the situation.

never the less they need to boost faction/dead space/officer armor mods because they are useless at this point and ASB and AAR i think shield is also more populair
Quote:

With ancillary shield booster I use a med booster II, it cost me 2 mil isk, and i can tank everything without the fear of dying, and I remain cap stable. An ancillary MWD is one of the better ideas, because when slots are few, and your cap is bad, an ancillary can help very much.

Caldari ships for example does not have the luxury of having a good cap, and usually med slots are taken by the tank or tackle/ewar modules. An ancillary module limited as they are (8 cycle before reload), it gives extra modules to fit, meaning you don't have to fit cap booster if you use it with ASB, and there is more room for more useful ewar modules.

I bet that those who oppose ancillary are all armor tankers, who are disappointed that ancillary armor rep is not good, and ancillary shield tankers have a better fighting chance.


for the form i fly all races and use shield and armor tank

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

12Next page