These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Tiericide the Meta for all Modules
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Juniorama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-02-20 02:34:12 UTC
All modules should have tiericide done to them. There are too many modules whose sole value is to be reprocessed. Each module should have a distinct role to play.

As a vague example.

Turret X

Meta 0 - Remains as is for a baseline

Meta 1 - Has greatest structure amount for longevity while being overheated of all Meta 1-4 . Same damage and range as Meta 0.

Meta 2 - Lowest CPU available of all Meta 1-4. Same damage and range as Meta 0.

Meta 3 - Lowest Powergrid available of all Meta 1-4. Same damage and range as Meta 0.

Meta 4 - Low CPU and Powergrid. Same damage and range as Meta 0.

Mata 5 - Tech 2 - Increased damage and range with increased Powergrid and CPU.


This should give all modules a valuable role to play while increasing the versatility of all ships. Fitting ships will become even
more of an art.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#2 - 2013-02-20 05:29:24 UTC
I proposed something like that even before tiericide was a word. I'd like to see this.

If the meta modules are then dropped as fragments that count as blueprints and need the t1 part plus some minor materials, I'll be a happy manufacturer.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#3 - 2013-02-20 06:58:24 UTC
I could only see this working if the gap between T1 and T2 modules was also narrowed, either buffing T1 or nerfing T2, or a combination.

How many people want that?

Friends
Juniorama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-02-20 14:21:45 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I could only see this working if the gap between T1 and T2 modules was also narrowed, either buffing T1 or nerfing T2, or a combination.

How many people want that?



Which modules are you worried about? I don't see the relevance of a narrowed gap to tiericided modules.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#5 - 2013-02-20 15:22:47 UTC
Juniorama wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I could only see this working if the gap between T1 and T2 modules was also narrowed, either buffing T1 or nerfing T2, or a combination.

How many people want that?



Which modules are you worried about? I don't see the relevance of a narrowed gap to tiericided modules.

The whole point of Tiericide was to remove the 'tiers' between ships in the same class, and also close the power gaps between the classes. Thats why Frigates and cruisers were buffed, battle cruisers found a middle ground and I expect the higher end BS's will also find a middle ground.

There is a huge gap between T1 and T2 modules, and meta gear bridges that gap. If you want to make all meta gear basically as effective as T1 then you will leave a power gap. How do you intend to fill or reduce is?

Friends
Juniorama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-02-20 16:09:03 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
Juniorama wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I could only see this working if the gap between T1 and T2 modules was also narrowed, either buffing T1 or nerfing T2, or a combination.

How many people want that?



Which modules are you worried about? I don't see the relevance of a narrowed gap to tiericided modules.

The whole point of Tiericide was to remove the 'tiers' between ships in the same class, and also close the power gaps between the classes. Thats why Frigates and cruisers were buffed, battle cruisers found a middle ground and I expect the higher end BS's will also find a middle ground.

There is a huge gap between T1 and T2 modules, and meta gear bridges that gap. If you want to make all meta gear basically as effective as T1 then you will leave a power gap. How do you intend to fill or reduce is?


Once again, reduce or fill what gap?

How do Meta 4 hardeners reduce the gap between T1 and T2 variants. Only Meta 4 hardeners are used totally replacing T1 and all other Metas. This is the same for all resist modules, only the highest meta is used for powergrid or cpu concerns.

Meta 4 Shield Power Relay is equal to T2 in terms of cap recharge rate bonus and shield recharge rate bonus while having lower fitting requirements.

How do any Meta do this? All meta are just as available as T1. If you can't find one for sale on market chances are it is useless except for reprocessing. Almost all Metas can be bought at mineral value on buy orders in Jita.

Finally, the purpose of tiericide is to remove gradients, as you describe the use of Metas, and replace it with a useful item which T1, Meta 1 - 3 are not.


Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#7 - 2013-02-20 16:39:44 UTC
+1'ed

60% of all modules in the game suck, lets make them not suck.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#8 - 2013-02-20 16:47:16 UTC
Juniorama wrote:
Once again, reduce or fill what gap?

How do Meta 4 hardeners reduce the gap between T1 and T2 variants. Only Meta 4 hardeners are used totally replacing T1 and all other Metas. This is the same for all resist modules, only the highest meta is used for powergrid or cpu concerns.

Meta 4 Shield Power Relay is equal to T2 in terms of cap recharge rate bonus and shield recharge rate bonus while having lower fitting requirements.

How do any Meta do this? All meta are just as available as T1. If you can't find one for sale on market chances are it is useless except for reprocessing. Almost all Metas can be bought at mineral value on buy orders in Jita.

Finally, the purpose of tiericide is to remove gradients, as you describe the use of Metas, and replace it with a useful item which T1, Meta 1 - 3 are not.

T1 HML - RoF = 15s / capacity 0.9m3
Meta 3 'XR-3200' HML - RoF = 13s / capacity 1.05m3
T2 HML - 12s / capacity 1.2m3

So the meta 3 laucnher sits around the middle of the difference between T1 and T2 RoF and ammo count.
If you want to remove these kinds of benefits from meta modules in favour of purely fitting or overheating benefits, then you better narrow the gap in effectiveness between the T1 baseline and the T2 top end.

in general, the system works fine right now. It is a bit odd that there are several mods that are meta 4 and are actually better than T2 because of their benefits regarding fittingsm cap use and/or effectiveness. That should be changed. Removing the effectiveness increases available through meat gear does not need to happen.

Friends
Juniorama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#9 - 2013-02-20 16:57:57 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
stuff.



Keep using your Meta 3 and have your gradient or start your own thread on how great the Meta system is.

I will use Meta 4 when I don't want to use T2, and ask for T1 and Meta 1-3 Modules to be made relevant.

Gradient is useless when just Meta 4 and T2 are the most desirable mods 99.9% of the time.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#10 - 2013-02-20 17:34:25 UTC
Juniorama wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
stuff.



Keep using your Meta 3 and have your gradient or start your own thread on how great the Meta system is.

I will use Meta 4 when I don't want to use T2, and ask for T1 and Meta 1-3 Modules to be made relevant.

Gradient is useless when just Meta 4 and T2 are the most desirable mods 99.9% of the time.

I chose meta 3 as a midpoint, for comparrison. If you couldn't work that out, well, theres not much hope for you is there.

So, back when Arbalest HML's were 16m a pop, how many people used them in PvP? I bet a lot more people used Limos or XR-3200 if they were unable to use T2.

I agree with your principle, but not how you suggest it. I cannot dumb this down any more for you. So, how about answering the question I've asked repeatedly:

How do you plan to narrow the power gap between T1 and T2 effectiveness without meta levels having enhanced abilities?

Friends
Fango Mango
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-02-20 18:22:20 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
Juniorama wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
stuff.



Keep using your Meta 3 and have your gradient or start your own thread on how great the Meta system is.

I will use Meta 4 when I don't want to use T2, and ask for T1 and Meta 1-3 Modules to be made relevant.

Gradient is useless when just Meta 4 and T2 are the most desirable mods 99.9% of the time.

I chose meta 3 as a midpoint, for comparrison. If you couldn't work that out, well, theres not much hope for you is there.

So, back when Arbalest HML's were 16m a pop, how many people used them in PvP? I bet a lot more people used Limos or XR-3200 if they were unable to use T2.

I agree with your principle, but not how you suggest it. I cannot dumb this down any more for you. So, how about answering the question I've asked repeatedly:

How do you plan to narrow the power gap between T1 and T2 effectiveness without meta levels having enhanced abilities?



You are missing the point . . .

We have Meta 0 -> Meta 5 for most modules
98% of the time people ONLY USE Meta 4 or Meta 5
That means that meta 1,2,3 are useless.

Instead of having 66% of the module variants never used, change the game so that there is *some* reason to use anything other than meta 4 or meta 0.

I will agree that some meta 4 modules are rare enough to make using a low meta item make sense (Heavy Missile Launcher, Medium Shield Extender, a couple random guns, micro aux power, plus more I can't think of), but for the most part everyone fits meta 4 or 5.

Lets make the game more interesting buy giving a purpose to all the "unused" meta items.

You make a good point that the different between meta 0 and meta 4 is often very large. If you want to make the primary attribute (DPS in a gun for example) of meta 0 much closer to the exisiting meta 4 that would make sense.


-FM
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#12 - 2013-02-20 20:33:22 UTC
That was basically my point, after skills and all, there is a huge gap between T2 and T1.

I often wondered why meta 4 modules are not only so much easier to fit than moat of the other meta levels, but are also so much more effective. Making Meta 1 the easiest to fit with weapons having a better ammo capacity could be helpful. Toning down the effectiveness of meta 4 modules and making them hardest to fit while also giving them the smallest ammo capacity, could also be a way to go.

I don't think we need to remove all the efficiency increases that the meta levels have, but changing other statistics as well as fitting requirements could be a good method of balancing the meta modules against each other.

Friends
Juniorama
State War Academy
Caldari State
#13 - 2013-02-22 02:16:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Juniorama
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
That was basically my point, after skills and all, there is a huge gap between T2 and T1.

I often wondered why meta 4 modules are not only so much easier to fit than moat of the other meta levels, but are also so much more effective. Making Meta 1 the easiest to fit with weapons having a better ammo capacity could be helpful. Toning down the effectiveness of meta 4 modules and making them hardest to fit while also giving them the smallest ammo capacity, could also be a way to go.

I don't think we need to remove all the efficiency increases that the meta levels have, but changing other statistics as well as fitting requirements could be a good method of balancing the meta modules against each other.



I personally believe that all Meta should have the same stats in regards to the most important stat of any module. Resist % for hardeners and DPS for weapon systems. Although something could be done turrets with range vs dps. IE. Greater range for less dps and less range for greater dps. I wouldn't know how to apply something similar to missiles. Sad

Things get more tricky when taking cargo hold expanders and other similar modules into mind.

How would you structure the Meta for weapons?
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#14 - 2013-02-22 13:15:52 UTC
Juniorama wrote:
How would you structure the Meta for weapons?

I was thinking of keeping the efficiency bonuses, but swapping the fitting differences. More DPS on weapons for more fitting, maybe less ammo capacity too. The easiest to fit would be the equivalent of meta 1 now, but with most ammo capacity, maybe better range.

Overall, I would also either reduce the top end of the efficiency or raise T1 slightly along with the lower meta modules.

As a concept, I think that could work. It means that if your tight on fitting or you want that bit more range or ammo before reloading, you could favour lower meta modules. Or, you can gimp your fit with more dps at the expense of ammo capacity and fittings.

Friends
Weasel Juice
Mayhem and Destruction
#15 - 2013-02-22 14:53:40 UTC
A reasonably small but constructive and interesting idea. Make modules other than meta 4, T2 and faction actually useful.

Not sure whether it's absolutely needed, but I'll +1 this for something that doesn't strike me as a "NO" idea.

T-Ups for the concept.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-02-23 22:48:24 UTC
On second thought their should be a **** tier of modules for nublets to use, paying 100k isk for one mod seems like a lot on a level 1 mission income.

More civilian modules?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Hakan MacTrew
Konrakas Forged
Solyaris Chtonium
#17 - 2013-02-24 08:12:47 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
On second thought their should be a **** tier of modules for nublets to use, paying 100k isk for one mod seems like a lot on a level 1 mission income.

More civilian modules?

That was Parr of my reasoning for swapping the fitting and benefits so that less effective modules will be easier to fit.

Friends