These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Officer Nyota Uhura
#301 - 2013-05-12 11:00:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Officer Nyota Uhura
Draconus Lofwyr wrote:
Thank you CCP, for another schlong in the face to small new alliances and new capital pilots, this is just one major stealth capital nerf and a gift to the old boy capital blob network.

let me break this down.

1. and primary CCP has some rigs that dont work on capitals, so instead of just fixing said rigs, they chose to introduce a massive isk sync (no make that a huge sucking vortex) in the form of 5X the materials for no real benefit as well as a whole new round of bpo's to be bought and researched.

2. this will increase the price of rigs across the board due to material scarcity. with absolutely no increase in return

3. The existing supers and capitals all have a lower cost to deploy, all future capital pilots will have a massive bump in cost to deploy, so existing major alliances that have a surplus in corp/alliance capitals will have an unfair advantage for a significant time frame.

4. super prices are about to take a massive bump in price AGAIN. when the mineral and drone region revamp hit, all ships took a massive bump of about a 50% increase in price, now the rigs will be about the same bump, so overall, say hello to a doubling in price since CCP figured they could "fix things"


over all, this is bound to mean that the nullsec status quo will be even more entrenched and remove the risk of loss for "new upstarts"

If CCP insists on this route of change for no return, and considering the proliferation of supers at this point, they may as well allow supers to dock at all low and null sec stations finally, after all, the main complaints everyone had about them at the outset have all been either fixed, nullified or made pointless.


Thanks for your ill-informed post. All your points are bad:

Your point 1. You talk about it as "ISK sink" when you obviously don't know what "ISK faucet" and "ISK sink" mean. (BPOs are, rig materials aren't)

Your point 2. Material prices for T2 rigs will not increase in the long run, as much fewer T2 rigs will be used on capitals. Currently capitals are the major user of large T2 rigs. Supply + demand will balance out.

Your point 3. Your point does NOT apply to capitals, only supercapitals. I don't know of any major alliance who has T2 rigs in their alliance capital doctrines (well, slowcats and tower bash doctrines at least).

Your point 4. Super prices aren't going to take any bumps due to this change -- rigs are. You can fit your super with T1 capital rigs if you wish. If you can't afford to buy a super because T2 rigs are some 5 billion more (only 2 billion more if you fly shield supers) then you clearly shouldn't be flying one.

This change is nothing. It's not like OMG THE RICH GUYS GET ADVANTAGE AGAIN. Neither is it a Y U NERF MY ARCHON. Standard fits will change a bit. Those who have tons of ISK will fit T2 to anything they like. And the continuing rate of inflation makes sure that soon people will be all happy fitting T2 rigs in their capitals, too.
Officer Nyota Uhura
#302 - 2013-05-12 11:01:53 UTC
Rroff wrote:
I hope your right, tho my arguement isn't so much about the cost as such but a more complicated dynamic especially in relation to wormhole space capital use where T2 rigs on carriers and dreads is very common place.


Well then it's about time to re-think your blingy wormhole capital doctrines. If you really want that 5% advantage you better be ready to pay for it.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#303 - 2013-05-12 13:48:13 UTC
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:


Well then it's about time to re-think your blingy wormhole capital doctrines. If you really want that 5% advantage you better be ready to pay for it.


You miss my point - its not about being ready to pay for it - if you look at the average capital fight in wormhole space theres super carrier levels of ISK going down on a regular basis. Unfortunatly I don't think I can explain the point very clearly hopefully someone else can.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#304 - 2013-05-12 13:59:25 UTC
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:


Your point 3. Your point does NOT apply to capitals, only supercapitals. I don't know of any major alliance who has T2 rigs in their alliance capital doctrines (well, slowcats and tower bash doctrines at least).



In wormhole space and to an extent some lowsec setups 2x T2 CCC, 1x T1 CCC rig is a standard fitting doctrine on triage Archons - especially in wormhole space where you need to make the most out of the ships you can fit through the mass available and the chances of facing a fleet that has a bhaal or 2 or neuting legions then that extra 100 cap/s or so is very useful - something that in nullsec and to a fair extent in lowsec is rarely if ever a concern. You can't just cyno in yet another triage archon rooks and kings style when **** hits the fan.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#305 - 2013-05-12 14:32:38 UTC
Rroff wrote:
In wormhole space and to an extent some lowsec setups 2x T2 CCC, 1x T1 CCC rig is a standard fitting doctrine on triage Archons - especially in wormhole space where you need to make the most out of the ships you can fit through the mass available and the chances of facing a fleet that has a bhaal or 2 or neuting legions then that extra 100 cap/s or so is very useful - something that in nullsec and to a fair extent in lowsec is rarely if ever a concern. You can't just cyno in yet another triage archon rooks and kings style when **** hits the fan.

Sounds like it is not so much a matter of making the most out of the ships but of the pilots available. If you cannot make a carrier doctrine work then switch it up and go old school with eWar and Logis .. solves your mass problem but adds pilot crunch.

But if you insist on using carriers:
The 2xT2+1xT1 CCC adds ~50 cap/s peak (110 total) on an Archon with my skills according to EFT which is a minuscule 12 cap/s more than with 3xT1 CCC .. with that small of a difference and the prospect of it costing as much as it is likely to, then perhaps it would be prudent to look into faction/officer cap mods which should be more than able to close that small performance gap at a price point well below the cost of T2 capital or even large rigs.

Run the numbers, with the amount of slots available on carriers there numerous ways to skin the kitten:
2xT1 CCC + 1xNavy Relay = 110 cap/s @ ~150M (ie. less than one large T2 CCC!). Use spare rig for resist hole, even more cap, RR efficiency or whatever you like .. remember that all rig options become available when the capital switch is made!

Hell, navy prices are rock bottom thanks to the FW farming bonanza so not using navy variants of all modules fitted to a capital is just being stingy.

In short: As long as you get some new mittens, it does not matter how you skinned the kittens!
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#306 - 2013-05-12 16:04:23 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

But if you insist on using carriers:
The 2xT2+1xT1 CCC adds ~50 cap/s peak (110 total) on an Archon with my skills according to EFT which is a minuscule 12 cap/s more than with 3xT1 CCC .. with that small of a difference and the prospect of it costing as much as it is likely to, then perhaps it would be prudent to look into faction/officer cap mods which should be more than able to close that small performance gap at a price point well below the cost of T2 capital or even large rigs.


On the kind of fits commonly used for high end wormhole triage - ignoring implants - its around ~96-97 cap/s, with the implants I usually run on my triage its the difference of 114.6 cap/s. Which can make a fair difference against neuting. All my carriers already have a full set of faction CPRs as a matter of course and so will most C5/6 wormhole people.


You don't always have the numbers to go ewar and logi - infact as a lot of fights happen on a wormhole at close range ECM tengus aside most ewar won't live long and as often you go into fights burning bridges behind you (wormholes collapsed) you can't bring the additional numbers in later if they do come online subsequently.
Officer Nyota Uhura
#307 - 2013-05-12 17:12:37 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:
Your point 3. Your point does NOT apply to capitals, only supercapitals. I don't know of any major alliance who has T2 rigs in their alliance capital doctrines (well, slowcats and tower bash doctrines at least).
In wormhole space and to an extent some lowsec setups 2x T2 CCC, 1x T1 CCC rig is a standard fitting doctrine on triage Archons.

The man said: "existing major alliances that have a surplus in corp/alliance capitals", so I too referred to major alliances, but I guess that from your point of view wormhole corps are ~relevant~.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#308 - 2013-05-12 17:32:02 UTC
Rroff wrote:
On the kind of fits commonly used for high end wormhole triage - ignoring implants - its around ~96-97 cap/s, with the implants I usually run on my triage its the difference of 114.6 cap/s. Which can make a fair difference against neuting. All my carriers already have a full set of faction CPRs as a matter of course and so will most C5/6 wormhole people.

You don't always have the numbers to go ewar and logi - infact as a lot of fights happen on a wormhole at close range ECM tengus aside most ewar won't live long and as often you go into fights burning bridges behind you (wormholes collapsed) you can't bring the additional numbers in later if they do come online subsequently.

I know where you are coming from and what you are peddling, but think about it .. all rigs will now have an effect on capital mods.

That is HUGE!

Fitting for pure cap is still possible of course but it will no longer be the only path; aux pumps, nano accels and RR augmentors are all viable options to counter potential neuting when it comes to survival of you and yours. In the end it will require minimal tweakage of fits to get around the T2 capital rig price issue.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#309 - 2013-05-12 18:02:31 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

I know where you are coming from and what you are peddling, but think about it .. all rigs will now have an effect on capital mods.

That is HUGE!

Fitting for pure cap is still possible of course but it will no longer be the only path; aux pumps, nano accels and RR augmentors are all viable options to counter potential neuting when it comes to survival of you and yours. In the end it will require minimal tweakage of fits to get around the T2 capital rig price issue.



Bare in mind tho that when faced with neuting of any significant amount overall cap regen amount will do far more to fight it than reducing the cap usage of your modules (as a generalisation - there may be some combinations that work).

TBH I'm posting too much in specifics tho my real complaint is the fact that a lot of rigs that are commonly used day to day in other parts of eve outside of general nullsec use are suddenly going to become (a) something thats going to be hard to justify in every day fights even when moderate levels of pimp make sense and more importantly (b) barely used by the ships that are targetted at with no real alternative for the ships that used to use them before.


While not a direct comparision its kind of like taking faction EANMs and over-night increasing the price to 1.5bn each.

There is an ISK angle to it sure but thats not the main focus/motivation of my complaint at a personal level - I have enough pre-rigged carriers to probably see me through my likely eve career and if push comes to shove I have access to the ability to make enough ISK to cover T2 capital rigging them with a bit of effort.
Officer Nyota Uhura
#310 - 2013-05-12 20:51:02 UTC
Rroff wrote:
TBH I'm posting too much in specifics tho my real complaint is the fact that a lot of rigs that are commonly used day to day in other parts of eve outside of general nullsec use are suddenly going to become (a) something thats going to be hard to justify in every day fights even when moderate levels of pimp make sense and more importantly (b) barely used by the ships that are targetted at with no real alternative for the ships that used to use them before.

So we have come from the point when t1 rigs were so expensive that you never fitted them to anything below battleship to the point where people start to QQ when they can't fit the most expensive and rarest of rigs to every ship they fly. When did we become such a bunch of crybabies?

No, you don't need to be able to max pimp your every ship.

Hell, why not make T2 rigs free altogether? Would that make you happy?
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#311 - 2013-05-12 21:05:44 UTC
Officer Nyota Uhura wrote:
Rroff wrote:
TBH I'm posting too much in specifics tho my real complaint is the fact that a lot of rigs that are commonly used day to day in other parts of eve outside of general nullsec use are suddenly going to become (a) something thats going to be hard to justify in every day fights even when moderate levels of pimp make sense and more importantly (b) barely used by the ships that are targetted at with no real alternative for the ships that used to use them before.

So we have come from the point when t1 rigs were so expensive that you never fitted them to anything below battleship to the point where people start to QQ when they can't fit the most expensive and rarest of rigs to every ship they fly. When did we become such a bunch of crybabies?

No, you don't need to be able to max pimp your every ship.

Hell, why not make T2 rigs free altogether? Would that make you happy?


I don't think you understood my post or the ones before it. This isn't about cost or max pimping a ship directly and more to do with a mixture of granularity and dramatic adjustments to established gameplay mechanics.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#312 - 2013-05-13 06:35:28 UTC
If a single standardised fit has become as ubiquitous as you suggest that's a sure sign that the status quo is imbalanced and needs to be adjusted.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
GreenSeed
#313 - 2013-05-14 12:42:08 UTC
good change, but i am concerned about the material bottleneck. considering that right now there's one already with 3 sets of rigs, spreading mats over 4 sets of rigs will just make it worse.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#314 - 2013-05-14 13:09:39 UTC
Also a bit concerned on the final price of Equiped battleships. Lrge rigs are already a bit expensive, now they are goign to be more expensive due to material shortage AND theie battleship base prices are beign ihcreased.

Not very good for a class of ships that was struglling to keep relevant!

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Officer Nyota Uhura
#315 - 2013-05-15 06:49:59 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Also a bit concerned on the final price of Equiped battleships. Lrge rigs are already a bit expensive, now they are goign to be more expensive due to material shortage AND theie battleship base prices are beign ihcreased.

Not very good for a class of ships that was struglling to keep relevant!

Capital ships are rather a small user of large rigs at the moment. Most large rigs are installed and destroyed in battleships. The changes in material needs won't be very dramatic in the long run. However, GreenSeed has a point that when industrial guys and traders start to create stocks of rigs, there's a temporary increase in demand for rig material. I bought a small buffer of 10 billion in rig materials just in case.
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#316 - 2013-05-17 08:14:02 UTC
When you get to where you have capital rigs you can then look at what a rig is supposed to do.

Right now an issue in EVE is, a battleship is not really much more than a really big, slow frigate. Rigs reflect that. They are all identical and enforce the idea that ship class is not that well defined.

Put Capital rigs in but put Capital rigs in that make sense. Example, keeping in mind, Capital ships siege. It would be nice to have a capital rig that influences siege mechanics?

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Blue Binary
Polychoron
#317 - 2013-05-18 16:40:50 UTC
Any plans to allow freighters to fit capital rigs?
Admiral Bart Major
Monkas Legion
Monkas Coalition
#318 - 2013-05-19 15:22:59 UTC
Will there be an egress port maximizer capital Rig to effect the Capital Energy Transfer Array/s or does the Large egress maximizer already effect these mods?

http://s30.postimg.org/4tse1zsqp/DGS_Recruitment.jpg  <-- DGS Recruitment Pic -

http://michael-major.deviantart.com/ <-- Lots of EVE Pics.

http://eveskunk.com/v2/index.php <-- EVESkunk.com.
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#319 - 2013-05-23 16:12:11 UTC
Admiral Bart Major wrote:
Will there be an egress port maximizer capital Rig to effect the Capital Energy Transfer Array/s or does the Large egress maximizer already effect these mods?


Any large will influence a Capital the same as it does a Battle Ship.

I'm sure if CCP had a tool to determine what rigs are on capitals and super capitals they could condense it to less rigs than I have fingers though. Without Capital specific rigs it's an homogenized system. I like that they are adding Capital grade because now they can look at all the Rig BPO's and define from frigate up what modified additions we want for each ship.

I'd like to see Dust oriented rigs as well but I don't expect anyone to rig their Moros for Orbital bombardment short of being forced to do so to hold Sov. Unless you can rig 10 Moros and pretty much insure no Dust incursion will succeed, it won't happen and I don't know if CCP will do that sort of thing for a very long time. They prefer to ignore carnage for at least a year before they 'fix' the bias.

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#320 - 2013-05-23 17:51:02 UTC
How did this thread get to 16 pages?

The rigs give the same benefit as the small, medium, and large rigs but take more materials to make.

A few pages of "oh noes the sky is falling" because rig materials will bounce around as supplies stabilize.

A few questions about capital specific rigs, such as rigs that affect siege modules similar to ice and mercoxit medium rigs. Also a few questions about BPO cost and availability.

Boom, thread done in 5 pages. Lock, sticky and move on. There really isn't that much discussion to making cap rigs, how this abomination of a 16 page thread happened escapes me.