These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

First post First post First post
Author
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#101 - 2013-03-27 00:11:05 UTC
well, the "minmatar are to strong so we nerf TE" argument is not very convincing. Its not like this module would be restricted to projectile weapons.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Terraka WOLF
S.C.A.R
#102 - 2013-03-27 00:12:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Terraka WOLF
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Got some more Odyssey updates for you all, this time in the form of some module rebalancing! We're going to have a number of module balance changes released with EVE Online: Odyssey on June 4th, and our first batch to announce are the Remote Sensor Boosters and Tracking Enhancers.

Let's start with Remote Sensor Boosters. They give pretty extreme bonuses to scan res at the moment, similar to officer sensor boosters. This has contributed to the growth of instalock camps that are in our opinion are a bit too easy nowadays.
So we're gonna decrease the scan res bonuses so that they give a solid but more reasonable benefit over local boosters. We're leaving the lock range bonus of the T1 and T2 remote boosters the same since we don't see them as overpowered for that role, and actually buffing the lock range bonus from the meta remote boosters since they are currently all giving T1 meta 0 level bonuses for that stat right now.

Key stat for this change is that the best Remote Sensor Boosters will have their Scan Resolution bonus reduced from 40.5% to 33%.

Apologies for the terrible formatting (you can copypaste into a spreadsheet and it looks good)

typeName Old ScanRes Bonus New ScanRes Bonus Old LockRange Bonus New LockRange Bonus
Remote Sensor Booster I 33.8 28 33.8 33.8
Coadjunct Linked Sensor Array I 35.4 29 33.8 35
Linked Sensor Network 40.5 30 33.8 36
Connected Scanning CPU Uplink 37.1 31 33.8 37
F-23 Reciprocal Sensor Cluster Link 38.8 32 33.8 38
Remote Sensor Booster II 40.5 33 40.5 40.5
'Boss' Remote Sensor Booster I 40.5 33 33.8 39
'Entrepreneur' Remote Sensor Booster I 40.5 33 40.5 40.5


Now for TEs. It's a fairly well accepted fact that the great optimal and falloff bonuses on TEs are over the top, especially considering they can get them while also simultaneously giving decent tracking boosts. The strength of TEs has been one of the reasons for Minmatar dominance in recent years, as well as contributing to the relative strength of shield tanking over armor tanking by inflating the value of non-tank low slots. What we're looking at is simply decreasing the falloff and optimal bonuses of all TEs by 1/3, and leaving their tracking bonus intact.

Key stat for this change is a reduction in the Optimal/Falloff bonus on a T2 Tracking Enhancer from 15%/30% to 10%/20%.

Name OldFalloff NewFalloff OldOptimal NewOptimal
Azimuth Descalloping Tracking Enhancer 11 7.4 5.5 3.7
Basic Tracking Enhancer 10 6.6 5 3.3
Beam Parallax Tracking Program 12 8 6 4
Beta-Nought Tracking Mode 10.5 7 5.25 3.5
F-AQ Delay-Line Scan Tracking Subroutines 11.5 7.6 5.75 3.8
Tracking Enhancer I 20 13.4 10 6.7
Sigma-Nought Tracking Mode I 21 14 10.5 7
Auto-Gain Control Tracking Enhancer I 22 14.6 11 7.3
F-aQ Phase Code Tracking Subroutines 23 15.4 11.5 7.7
Fourier Transform Tracking Program 24 16 12 8
Tracking Enhancer II 30 20 15 10
Domination Tracking Enhancer 30 20 15 10
Republic Fleet Tracking Enhancer 30 20 15 10
Mizuro's Modified Tracking Enhancer 31.5 21 15.75 10.5
Hakim's Modified Tracking Enhancer 33 22 16.5 11
Gotan's Modified Tracking Enhancer 34.5 23 17.25 11.5
Tobias' Modified Tracking Enhancer 36 24 18 12

This change will be somewhat painful for many ships that rely on TEs for range in their current fits, but we are confident that the change is necessary to establish balance between the different weapon upgrade modules.

Let me know what you think!





Ok so i have never post on here because i didnt realy see a need to before which bring me to my point of not in this entire blog have i seen metion of incursion fleets. which heavly use TE's on there ships. Especaily the Vindi. this change would both criple the vindi, hurt all the other fleet memmbers and make the billions we spent on faction TE's useless. Do you have any comments on this as this seems to be a problem to me at least.
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2013-03-27 00:14:18 UTC
The biggest issue with TCs is the crazy cpu requirement and armor ships are usually quite low cpu, lower that and they will be way more popular
Hoarr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#104 - 2013-03-27 00:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Hoarr
Terraka WOLF wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Got some more Odyssey updates for you all, this time in the form of some module rebalancing! We're going to have a number of module balance changes released with EVE Online: Odyssey on June 4th, and our first batch to announce are the Remote Sensor Boosters and Tracking Enhancers.

Let's start with Remote Sensor Boosters. They give pretty extreme bonuses to scan res at the moment, similar to officer sensor boosters. This has contributed to the growth of instalock camps that are in our opinion are a bit too easy nowadays.
So we're gonna decrease the scan res bonuses so that they give a solid but more reasonable benefit over local boosters. We're leaving the lock range bonus of the T1 and T2 remote boosters the same since we don't see them as overpowered for that role, and actually buffing the lock range bonus from the meta remote boosters since they are currently all giving T1 meta 0 level bonuses for that stat right now.

Key stat for this change is that the best Remote Sensor Boosters will have their Scan Resolution bonus reduced from 40.5% to 33%.

Apologies for the terrible formatting (you can copypaste into a spreadsheet and it looks good)

typeName Old ScanRes Bonus New ScanRes Bonus Old LockRange Bonus New LockRange Bonus
Remote Sensor Booster I 33.8 28 33.8 33.8
Coadjunct Linked Sensor Array I 35.4 29 33.8 35
Linked Sensor Network 40.5 30 33.8 36
Connected Scanning CPU Uplink 37.1 31 33.8 37
F-23 Reciprocal Sensor Cluster Link 38.8 32 33.8 38
Remote Sensor Booster II 40.5 33 40.5 40.5
'Boss' Remote Sensor Booster I 40.5 33 33.8 39
'Entrepreneur' Remote Sensor Booster I 40.5 33 40.5 40.5


Now for TEs. It's a fairly well accepted fact that the great optimal and falloff bonuses on TEs are over the top, especially considering they can get them while also simultaneously giving decent tracking boosts. The strength of TEs has been one of the reasons for Minmatar dominance in recent years, as well as contributing to the relative strength of shield tanking over armor tanking by inflating the value of non-tank low slots. What we're looking at is simply decreasing the falloff and optimal bonuses of all TEs by 1/3, and leaving their tracking bonus intact.

Key stat for this change is a reduction in the Optimal/Falloff bonus on a T2 Tracking Enhancer from 15%/30% to 10%/20%.

Name OldFalloff NewFalloff OldOptimal NewOptimal
Azimuth Descalloping Tracking Enhancer 11 7.4 5.5 3.7
Basic Tracking Enhancer 10 6.6 5 3.3
Beam Parallax Tracking Program 12 8 6 4
Beta-Nought Tracking Mode 10.5 7 5.25 3.5
F-AQ Delay-Line Scan Tracking Subroutines 11.5 7.6 5.75 3.8
Tracking Enhancer I 20 13.4 10 6.7
Sigma-Nought Tracking Mode I 21 14 10.5 7
Auto-Gain Control Tracking Enhancer I 22 14.6 11 7.3
F-aQ Phase Code Tracking Subroutines 23 15.4 11.5 7.7
Fourier Transform Tracking Program 24 16 12 8
Tracking Enhancer II 30 20 15 10
Domination Tracking Enhancer 30 20 15 10
Republic Fleet Tracking Enhancer 30 20 15 10
Mizuro's Modified Tracking Enhancer 31.5 21 15.75 10.5
Hakim's Modified Tracking Enhancer 33 22 16.5 11
Gotan's Modified Tracking Enhancer 34.5 23 17.25 11.5
Tobias' Modified Tracking Enhancer 36 24 18 12

This change will be somewhat painful for many ships that rely on TEs for range in their current fits, but we are confident that the change is necessary to establish balance between the different weapon upgrade modules.

Let me know what you think!





Ok so i have never post on here because i didnt realy see a need to before but i have read this entire thread and as some one stated before WHY THE HECK ARE FACTION THE SAME A T2!! if that is gona be the change can i have back the 2bil i spent buying faction ones for my incursion ships. which bring me to my next point of not in this entire blog have i seen metion of incursion fleets. which heavly use TE's on there ships. Especaily the Vindi. this change would both criple the vindi, hurt all the other fleet memmbers and make the billions we spent on faction TE's useless. Do you have any comments on this as this seems to be a problem to me at least.




HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Quoting for posterity.

You idiot, the faction TEs were ALREADY the same as the T2s for optimal and falloff. You need to actually look at stuff before you buy it. The only difference was that they have smaller fitting requirements and .5% more tracking, neither of which are getting changed.
Pinky Denmark
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#105 - 2013-03-27 00:16:06 UTC
Loving these changes - Eve pvp really need both these changes...

Static gate camps are worse for Eve pvp than anything it might help solve and making shield/gank setups less attractive while making tracking computers viable is a welcome change for me.

Pinky
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#106 - 2013-03-27 00:16:31 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Terraka WOLF wrote:
Ok so i have never post on here because i didnt realy see a need to before but i have read this entire thread and as some one stated before WHY THE HECK ARE FACTION THE SAME A T2!! if that is gona be the change can i have back the 2bil i spent buying faction ones for my incursion ships. which bring me to my next point of not in this entire blog have i seen metion of incursion fleets. which heavly use TE's on there ships. Especaily the Vindi. this change would both criple the vindi, hurt all the other fleet memmbers and make the billions we spent on faction TE's useless. Do you have any comments on this as this seems to be a problem to me at least.


We're not changing the relative strength of faction TEs vs T2 at all. Faction retains its tracking and fittings advantage, and if the faction TEs were worth the price premium over T2 for your purposes before they will continue to be worth the price premium.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2013-03-27 00:17:11 UTC
Vilnius Zar wrote:
Alticus C Bear wrote:
Vilnius Zar wrote:
When the Falloff range bonus on TE was introduced, and in that same patch projectile ammo got buffed, it was obvious that it would become silly. Per usual it takes a few years for CCP to catch on but I'm happy it's finally getting addressed. I like this armour buff a lot.



It is not an armour buff; it is a short range weapon nerf, missile buff and the relatively low impact it will have on pulses with scorch will result in even heavier dominance of Amarr resistance based buffer ships in fleets.


Yes it very much is an armour buff, armour tankers can still use TC if needed. More importantly it's a kiting nerf so tankier ships (generally armour tanked ones) will benefit.


Why is it a kiting nerf? Your range is lower their range is lower and they are probably using missiles anyway.
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#108 - 2013-03-27 00:17:17 UTC
RIP Medium Rail Guns.
(turns off the life support machine)

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

DRGaius Baltar
Perkone
Caldari State
#109 - 2013-03-27 00:17:42 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Serenety Steel wrote:
If it aint broke, DON'T fix it!


Way to nerf some more stuff, well done ccp..


These are broke, so we're fixing them.


Moon goo ETA??????? or will i be dead by then
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#110 - 2013-03-27 00:19:35 UTC
As a former heavy missile user, I too would like to say 'feel my pain' to all of the minmater whiners out there. This is long overdue and I for one support these changes.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...

Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#111 - 2013-03-27 00:20:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Iris Bravemount
Edit: I must have missread something somewhere. Forget I said anything.

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed

Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-03-27 00:20:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
tbh fozzie, tundragon camps 23/7 and we never use remote sensor boosters simply because they are too much of a pain to get on the locker prior to someone jumping into a camp. If you are nerfing them solely to prevent instalock camps, it's kind of unnecessary as in my couple of years of being around people who camp a lot, we have never used remote sebos much. (because of the locking delay when everyone is landing on a gate.)

also, please stop trying to nerf camps. They only achieve good things by purging idiocy. It's not hard to get into lowsec if you are smart. If you are dumb you jump into a camp system unscouted. If you are smart you either get a friend/alt to scout, or you jump into a system that hardly gets camped.

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

Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#113 - 2013-03-27 00:22:57 UTC
Iris Bravemount wrote:
TCs give the same percentage bonus to Optimal and Falloff, which seems ok, because the ratio between optimal and falloff isn't changed. Weapons with good optimal gain a lot of optimal and weapons with good falloff gain a lot of falloff.

What are you talking about? A range-scripted TC gives +15% optimal and + 30% falloff; unscripted, it's +7.5% optimal and +15% falloff. The reason for the difference is that a kilometer of optimal is roughly twice as useful as a kilometer of falloff in terms of applied damage.
Hoarr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#114 - 2013-03-27 00:23:09 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
As a former heavy missile user, I too would like to say 'feel my pain' to all of the minmater whiners out there. This is long overdue and I for one support these changes.


This is literally not even the same issue, aside from all the sperg that is about to flow into this thread.

Small changes in range at short distances have huge impacts because of the range of points.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#115 - 2013-03-27 00:24:38 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We're not changing the relative strength of faction TEs vs T2 at all. Faction retains its tracking and fittings advantage, and if the faction TEs were worth the price premium over T2 for your purposes before they will continue to be worth the price premium.


This I like.

brb, buying ALL the TEs.

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

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#116 - 2013-03-27 00:27:43 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We're not changing the relative strength of faction TEs vs T2 at all. Faction retains its tracking and fittings advantage, and if the faction TEs were worth the price premium over T2 for your purposes before they will continue to be worth the price premium.


This I like.

brb, buying ALL the TEs.


I'm talking about faction strength relative to T2 strength. That means they're getting reduced by the same percentage, not that we're leaving faction as-is.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#117 - 2013-03-27 00:29:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


We're not changing the relative strength of faction TEs vs T2 at all. Faction retains its tracking and fittings advantage, and if the faction TEs were worth the price premium over T2 for your purposes before they will continue to be worth the price premium.


This I like.

brb, buying ALL the TEs.


I'm talking about faction strength relative to T2 strength. That means they're getting reduced by the same percentage, not that we're leaving faction as-is.


Yes, but it is still nice.

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

ROSSLINDEN0
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#118 - 2013-03-27 00:30:21 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
tbh fozzie, tundragon camps 23/7 and we never use remote sensor boosters simply because they are too much of a pain to get on the locker prior to someone jumping into a camp. If you are nerfing them solely to prevent instalock camps, it's kind of unnecessary as in my couple of years of being around people who camp a lot, we have never used remote sebos much. (because of the locking delay when everyone is landing on a gate.)

also, please stop trying to nerf camps. They only achieve good things by purging idiocy. It's not hard to get into lowsec if you are smart. If you are dumb you jump into a camp system unscouted. If you are smart you either get a friend/alt to scout, or you jump into a system that hardly gets camped.


The nerf to RSB was just to stop that prick Cowwarrior!
Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
#119 - 2013-03-27 00:35:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Daneel Trevize
I want to reiterate that CCP really can't mention a TE change without talking about how terrible medium railguns are & that they should be buffed, in damage applied as well as fitting.
You tell me, does anyone use them for anything except noobs in lvl3s? I'm aware this is titled a 'Part One' thread.

Also, that was an interesting point made that Drop has a different practical strength to the other gun drugs.
And that blasters will notice the optimal loss & almost never be better with a TC than with a web, but perhaps could do with a little more tracking or dps still, as drones are kinda ******** at reliably applying damage depending on target speed, sig, etc.

That and faction TEs are pretty terrible vs T2 regardless of their price.
Taoist Dragon
The Flying Dead.
#120 - 2013-03-27 00:37:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Taoist Dragon
All the people saying kiting is gonna be killed by this are crazy......

Kiting will still be possible and a brawler will still be easily kited to death.

What this does is reduce (very slightly) the range advantage for the kiter. nothing else.


Bring on the change it's gonna be fun Twisted

*Powering up my Auto's*

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.