These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Testing ASB adjustments on Duality

First post First post
Author
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#21 - 2012-09-19 19:27:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloodpetal
You need to limit the ASB's to 1 booster per ship hard limit. Keep them as is and just do that.

The reason for this is simple, if you run a NORMAL booster and an ASB you can get some good tanking. If you run a BUFFER fit and an ASB you can get some good results. As the ATX showed, you can get some great results in a fleet with a Logistics ship supported by ASB fits.

Running 2 simultaneously is where the problem becomes a huge issue.


To comment on the current adjustments, I think that reducing the # of cap boosters is handicapping the module and not balancing it with the ACTUAL problems that they're facing.

Where I am.

Helen O'Malley
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2012-09-19 19:35:27 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:
You need to limit the ASB's to 1 booster per ship hard limit. Keep them as is and just do that.

The reason for this is simple, if you run a NORMAL booster and an ASB you can get some good tanking. If you run a BUFFER fit and an ASB you can get some good results. As the ATX showed, you can get some great results in a fleet with a Logistics ship supported by ASB fits.

Running 2 simultaneously is where the problem becomes a huge issue.


To comment on the current adjustments, I think that reducing the # of cap boosters is handicapping the module and not balancing it with the ACTUAL problems that they're facing.


i quote everything....

+1 for the "one booster per ship" limit...

helen.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#23 - 2012-09-19 19:38:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloodpetal
Here's the problem with your "Fix".


It's that you're nerfing it for LEGITIMATE uses such as for ancillary (backup system, by definition) boosting for Logistics Reps, for a main Shield booster, for a buffer tank being used alone.

And in the process you've have made it even WORSE at being an ancillary system, and now the only way to use it is in DUAL SHIELD BOOSTING, and now even TRIPLE shield boosting setups. You're only enhancing the reason to put MORE dual shield boosters on, and not actually addressing the issue of why they are overpowered, and only exacerbating the problem.

I'm all for testing this out. But I think you're just nerfing the module and not the problem. Shocked

Where I am.

Fellblade
Gemini Talon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#24 - 2012-09-19 19:42:49 UTC
A limit of one per ship would seem to be sensible. Given the massive downsides (huge fitting reqs, massive reload time), and the natural limitations of active tanking the ASBs need to have a significant payoff if they are to remain being used.

It might help if CCP explained what the perceived issues are with the ASBs, and how they think their changes are addressing them.

http://theexcession.blogspot.com - A Wormhole PvP blog.

Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#25 - 2012-09-19 19:50:04 UTC
The only other idea I had for ASB's was that for larger cap boosters than needed (i.e. 100's instead of 50's for an MASB), you can get a cap boost while getting a shield boost simultaneously.

This would be a much smaller cap boost than a cap booster of course, but that's the only thing that has occured to me that would be cool, WITH a limit to 1 ASB per ship. But that's just a side thought.

Where I am.

Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#26 - 2012-09-19 20:16:23 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Hi all! As mentioned in this thorough post by CCP Fozzie, we're going to have Duality up and running for a few days to test some of the stuff we're doing in the winter expansion.

One of those things are making adjustments to the Ancillary Shield Boosters. There is a version now on Duality with different stats, we would love for you guys to test them out with us to give us a better indication of whether these adjustments are the right one or not.

The adjustments are:

  • Reducing capacity in all four ASBs so they can now fit 7 normal ones (9 navy ones)
  • Upping the duration of X-Large ASB from 4 to 5 seconds
  • Adjusting the capacitor need of all four ASBs considerably


Again, we're still in the process of figuring out the best way to adjust the ASBs, so don't take the current stats as the final word on what will happen in the winter expansion. Hopefully this is just the first test of many with you guys.

Finally, there are a few other module adjustments we're contemplating, but are not testing right now, so more module testing is likely in the future.

Thanks in advance,
CCP SoniClover on behalf of Team Super Friends


This seems like it doesn't address any of the really critical failings of the ASB. But, I'll test it out.

/shrug

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-09-19 21:15:58 UTC
Pinky Denmark wrote:


Also 1 KEY feature I know you HAVE to adjust is the double overheat bonus.
Currently you don't only get a bonus to cycle time which makes you tank more but also making you run out of cap boosters faster - But at the same time you get an 10% extra hitpoint pr cycle... You MUST remove this as long people use oversized ASB.
I've seen people with oversized and double ASB master this to an advantage where the heat almost doesn't build up at all...


Thats the case for all boosters, ASB or not. Making them cycle faster would nerf them by overheating, which is stupid, they are supposed to get better for a burst period while overheating, not worse.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#28 - 2012-09-19 21:18:12 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:
You need to limit the ASB's to 1 booster per ship hard limit. Keep them as is and just do that.

The reason for this is simple, if you run a NORMAL booster and an ASB you can get some good tanking. If you run a BUFFER fit and an ASB you can get some good results. As the ATX showed, you can get some great results in a fleet with a Logistics ship supported by ASB fits.

Running 2 simultaneously is where the problem becomes a huge issue.


This is why a stacking penalty to fitting multiple ASBs would be the best solution.

edit: crap doublepost

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
#29 - 2012-09-19 21:33:06 UTC
James1122 wrote:
keep them as they are and just limit it so you can only fit 1 per ship


THIS ALL DAY

Can't wait to dual box my Dust toon and EVE toon on the same machine!

Gorski Car
#30 - 2012-09-19 22:04:26 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:

Yes, until we do the navy 50 version. Which I think we're going to do at some point, I just don't think it will make it into the winter expansion. But I've been wrong before Blink


Ahhhhh my hawk becomes possible to kill for a couple of months!

:P


You should try the quadruple-ASB Kitsune fit Twisted


Someone has broken into my EFT lab!

Collect this post

Celebris Nexterra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-09-19 22:07:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Celebris Nexterra
I honestly thought the 1 booster per ship change was going to be obvious, as in no one opposed and everyone else in favor.

I really think ASB's are just broken as a module in general. No one uses a standard shield booster anymore (for PvP), save for those who just came back to the game and don't know about the ASB yet. I think that alone says something. I am excluding the deadspace ones used on 100MNgus because the deadspace boosters are actually viable for PvP if cost isn't an option. But when an ASB gives the same tank as a normal deadspace booster, something is wrong. The #1 argument is always that a single ASB runs out of charges eventually and then you have to survive the reload, which is circumstantially impossible or easy; but a (cost effective) standard booster has the same problem in essence. Even though it doesn't have to reload, a t2 or basic faction booster doesn't have enough tank on a non-shield boost bonused ship to survive even mediocre DPS. Whereas any ship that can fit an XL ASB has a monster tank, even if it is for a short period of time. In fleet applications, this is a huge flaw, and an ASB ship will die easily. But in solo/small gang applications, an ASB ship is unstoppable. Also, it is invulnerable to neuting, something a standard booster can't say, even though both are subject to the alpha volley weakness.

I seem to stand alone on this, but those are my thoughts. Also, I hope this makes sense despite my terrible structuring.
Jezs
This is not the corporation you are looking for
#32 - 2012-09-19 23:22:24 UTC
Can you have my babies?
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
#33 - 2012-09-19 23:28:50 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Hi all! As mentioned in this thorough post by CCP Fozzie, we're going to have Duality up and running for a few days to test some of the stuff we're doing in the winter expansion.

One of those things are making adjustments to the Ancillary Shield Boosters. There is a version now on Duality with different stats, we would love for you guys to test them out with us to give us a better indication of whether these adjustments are the right one or not.

The adjustments are:

  • Reducing capacity in all four ASBs so they can now fit 7 normal ones (9 navy ones)
  • Upping the duration of X-Large ASB from 4 to 5 seconds
  • Adjusting the capacitor need of all four ASBs considerably


Again, we're still in the process of figuring out the best way to adjust the ASBs, so don't take the current stats as the final word on what will happen in the winter expansion. Hopefully this is just the first test of many with you guys.

Finally, there are a few other module adjustments we're contemplating, but are not testing right now, so more module testing is likely in the future.

Thanks in advance,
CCP SoniClover on behalf of Team Super Friends


This seems like it doesn't address any of the really critical failings of the ASB.

p much my view. Capacity, XL duration, and cap need werent really on my radar as a problem

Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM

Onslaughtor
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#34 - 2012-09-19 23:28:51 UTC
If you want to fix the ASB, just make a new modified one and seed it. At the same time stop seeding the old one. This was the original plan from what I remember. Economics will take care of the rest.
Dunmer Orion
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#35 - 2012-09-19 23:35:49 UTC
Well if we're voting...I'd say limit it to one per ship. Overall, I think it's a pretty effective module for solo PVP.

-DO
Rengerel en Distel
#36 - 2012-09-20 01:55:17 UTC
In all the threadnaughts about the ASB, nearly everyone suggested 1 per ship would fix it. CCP then decides to try and fiddle with it instead ... :CCP:

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.

Aliventi
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry.
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#37 - 2012-09-20 02:15:49 UTC
There is a strong case for only allowing one ASB per ship. It is a module that was designed to replace the typical shield booster with a cap booster. So getting two ASBs on a ship is like getting two free mid slots. Having two ASBs allows the pilot to alternate to allow them to always have one booster going and one reloading. There are some clever overheating tactics that allow the pilot to get more tank.

However, I think limiting the number of ASBs fit won't help as much as you think. Typically, those are fit to ships that have a rep bonus, with 20+% boost amount drugs, and offgrid boosts. The Hun. Reloaded Vargurs (with logi that was jammed and damped) proved one ASB or two won't make much a difference.

The issue isn't that people are fitting more than one of them. It's the issue that the module is overpowered. When a mod is overpowered you get people wiling to sacrifice almost anything to get more of it. This includes throwing several fitting mods and faction fitting their ships to get a ship that can tank a solo ship, but dies to a gang. Ex: Dead Sleipnir

In my opinion the main issues are the ASBs high shield boost and ability to sustain that shield boost. So you fix it by either make it hold less cap boosters, nerf how much it reps, or make the amount repped be based off of the booster put it (longer duration/less tank with smaller cap boosters vs. shorter duration/higher tank with larger cap boosters). Any of these changes will cause the ASB, rep bonus, drugs, and off grid boosters to be less effective. This in turn will make the pilot question if it is really worth it to make so many sacrifices to get a second ASB.

.....Another option is to ignore that the module is overpowered and just add a stacking penalty. However regular reps don't have a stacking penalty. I don't think this is a good solution.

.....Or you could go the easy way out and only allow one ASB per ship instead of balancing the module and allowing pilots to be creative with their fits and piloting.
nahjustwarpin
SUPER DUPER SPACE TRUCKS
#38 - 2012-09-20 03:23:06 UTC  |  Edited by: nahjustwarpin
every now and then we have some ridiculous decisions being made and not changed for years. Hurricanes with their powergrid, tengus with who know what dps at >110k range and now we have xasb and we will have to live with it.

Welcome to

XASB Online
Robert Lefcourt
BigPoppaMonkeys
E.B.O.L.A.
#39 - 2012-09-20 05:37:51 UTC
Allowing only one per ship won't fix ASB. We all saw AT, where only one was allowed - still everyone and their dog were fielding them - because they still rock. A good approach would be to match the fitting requirements of armor repairers /and/ allow only one per ship.


regards,

rob
Roime
Shiva Furnace
#40 - 2012-09-20 05:44:55 UTC
No, this is not the fix.

All you need to do is bring the fitting requirements to a level that corresponds with their size (XLASB is a battleship module, please compare it with LAR, it's twice as strong and combines two modules in one, yet you can fit it on cruisers) and change the repping amount to be dependant on the booster charge size.

.