These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[March] Damage Module Tiericide

First post
Author
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#41 - 2016-02-15 13:53:16 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
I was hoping you'd give some justice to Ballistic Control Systems by making their CPU use equal with other damage modules. A lot of fits on missile boats are currently very tight on CPU.


I disagree. Balance shouldn't involve making everything the same.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Stalence
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry
Templis CALSF
#42 - 2016-02-15 17:24:58 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Quote:
We are also bringing Minmatar/Angel BCS out of the wilderness and buffing them up the same level as the Caldari/Guristas equivalents.


First of all why? You're not bothered about bringing Caldari webs/scrams/disruptors out of the wilderness

Second of all Caldari Navy BCU's cost more than Republic Fleet BCU's and you're giving them the same stats. wtf?

Thirdly Gallente and Minmattar lp stores now get the best modules in scrams, webs, disruptors, and damage mods after these changes.


I second all these points. They can't be overlooked to arbitrarily buff another faction's LP store.

Member of #tweetfleet @stalence // Templis CALSF // YouTube Channel

Helsinki Atruin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2016-02-15 17:43:26 UTC
Stalence wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Quote:
We are also bringing Minmatar/Angel BCS out of the wilderness and buffing them up the same level as the Caldari/Guristas equivalents.


First of all why? You're not bothered about bringing Caldari webs/scrams/disruptors out of the wilderness

Second of all Caldari Navy BCU's cost more than Republic Fleet BCU's and you're giving them the same stats. wtf?

Thirdly Gallente and Minmattar lp stores now get the best modules in scrams, webs, disruptors, and damage mods after these changes.


I second all these points. They can't be overlooked to arbitrarily buff another faction's LP store.


not really, all damage mods are equal now, and i have to believe that the lp prices and tag numbers will be made equal (some tags will cost more, but that is annother issue) However, have you seen republic fleet hardeners, they are terrible.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#44 - 2016-02-15 21:11:43 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Quote:
We are also bringing Minmatar/Angel BCS out of the wilderness and buffing them up the same level as the Caldari/Guristas equivalents.


First of all why? You're not bothered about bringing Caldari webs/scrams/disruptors out of the wilderness

Second of all Caldari Navy BCU's cost more than Republic Fleet BCU's and you're giving them the same stats. wtf?

Thirdly Gallente and Minmattar lp stores now get the best modules in scrams, webs, disruptors, and damage mods after these changes.



This is a very good point. The primary stats for caldari webs scrams and disruptors are clearly inferior by ccps own reasoning. This is what CCP fozzie said when talking about meta 1 items:

"It’s important to note that none of the named modules specialize in stronger “primary” stats, as those modules would become the obvious best choice for most situations."

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/rebalancing-eve-one-module-at-a-time/

Yet the fed navy and minmatar disruptors, scrams and webs all have better primary stats than the caldari ones.

It seems pretty clear that not all meta 8 modules are equivalent.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Justin Cody
War Firm
#45 - 2016-02-17 01:08:51 UTC
So correct me if I'm wrong but the rate of fire on nearly everything is getting a boost. And this front loads damage more - which is a further buff to rapid light/heavy systems? I mean yes it is a buff to all systems but more to dps than a buff to alpha. I like it and I think it will help more at breaking logistics given how they have been readjusted recently.

I predict this will be a relatively celebrated change.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#46 - 2016-02-17 01:24:22 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Luscius Uta wrote:
I was hoping you'd give some justice to Ballistic Control Systems by making their CPU use equal with other damage modules. A lot of fits on missile boats are currently very tight on CPU.


I disagree. Balance shouldn't involve making everything the same.


Yeah I tend to think that balance has to happen in terms of factional flavor. So the Caldari/Khanid navies should have the best bcs's overall...and Caldari/Gallente for Magnetic Stabilizers - for lasers Ammatar and Amarr Navy but the pirate modules should be different in some way...have a pirate feel with maybe more CPU use but considerably more powerful effects.

Deadspace stuff is cutting edge technology and Officer is Bleeding Edge prototype stuff. That's why officer scrams take so much grid to produce a strength 6 effect.

Looking at the previous changes to the Focused Warp Field Disruption Script that give you a scram effect...we see the CONCORD and True Sansha variants give you the biggest effects and are comparably expensive. Why those factions? Well the CONCORD thing related well to the capital module changes and renaming. For the True Sansha faction I think its related to incursions and Sansha's technological edge over most of the empires - and his war vs the Sleepers/Drifters. So it makes sense.
Jimy F
Strategic Isks Investments Corporation
#47 - 2016-02-17 18:26:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jimy F
If you dont mind make some tweks for balistic systems controls, at faction level i propouse from 11 rof and 12 dmg to 10 rof and 13 dmg

i dont know how big difrece is for ccp, but for mission runer point of view there are some rats when you put all implants +6% for missiles all skills L5 and you make chrismas tree from ship, you take 4 or 5 faction bcs and with t2 dmg ring not rof rig, there are rats that in last shot still have 1% hp left :( if you take 0,5 % dmg form volley from bcs down, faction bcs very need 0,5% volley dmg up not down, there will be more that kind of rats, i think if you have all max implants and full faction fit you shoud be albe to cach this rats, if you make your change you make need to buy oficer bcs to do that, wich im my opinion will be in very bad taste from ccp, current chrismat tree are now, i dont know even wich words take to tell how sad this is, i propouse make for officere bcs the same volley dmg but biger rof then faction or biger volley
Zapp McDouche
Black Spot on Parchment
#48 - 2016-02-17 23:18:46 UTC
Good changes except that bcs still use way more cpu than magnetic field stabilizers and other turret damage mods.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#49 - 2016-02-18 01:34:43 UTC
I don't see any advantage to using Meta 0 over Meta 1 versions on this spreadsheet. Did I miss something here? Price, maybe?

So, if you are assuming that Meta 1 versions are going to cost more than Meta 0 versions, then you also better take a look at (a) the manufacturing cost of the Meta 0 version, (b) the reprocessing value of the new Meta 1 version, (c) the current quantity of existing Meta 1-4 versions in game (which I assume will all turn into the new Meta 1 version), and (d) the drop rate of the new Meta 1 version from NPC wrecks.

If the supply of new Meta 1 versions greatly exceeds demand, then its market price will drop to its reprocessing value, and if this price is below the manufacturing cost of the Meta 0 version, then there is no reason to ever build/use the Meta 0, except as a component to build the T2 version.

Ofc, this applies to all modules which are being tiericided, not just the damage modules.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#50 - 2016-02-18 03:10:36 UTC
This may sound of little importance but it is one of those things, the Khanid Royal Navy LP store. I know right, nobody has ever heard of that one since most mission runner overrun the SOE agents and wonder why they cannot enter Amarr space anymore.

Anyhow I close to a decade of EVE where I spent most of my highsec time in Khanid space, even lowsec for a while, I have never seen anyone use a Khanid ballistic control on any killmail.

I know they exist don't get me wrong but they are somewhat inaccessable, like most Khanid modules. Can we get someone to remedy that?
Those minmatar tags are very hard to come by or they cost such a rediculus amount of isk that nobody wants to buy them.

Hail King Khanid.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#51 - 2016-02-20 22:41:12 UTC
Zapp McDouche wrote:
Good changes except that bcs still use way more cpu than magnetic field stabilizers and other turret damage mods.


but the extra cpu cost of bcu's is already factored into fitting resources on missile hulls so if they reduce the fitting cost they will have to go through all ships that use them and reduce fitting resources accordingly. they'd just be digging holes to fill them in agan so there's no point
Yazon Varda
Full of Prestige
#52 - 2016-02-20 23:57:38 UTC
When this tiercide be in SISI?
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#53 - 2016-02-22 07:15:54 UTC
I like the Ammatar Heatsink getting a buff equal to the other faction heatsinks; tis will help with LP reards for Ammatar Navy mission runners.
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#54 - 2016-02-24 20:05:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Poranius Fisc
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
looks like they went from 10.5% rate of fire to 11% rate of fire, so that might have something to do with the 1.12 instead of 1.125 damage bonus.

It's still a nerf - particularly where rapid launchers are concerned.
And I still want the old BCS icons back.

And not only do missiles cost you more SP, their T2 Damage mods cost you 10 CPU more.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#55 - 2016-02-25 07:23:54 UTC
Swiftstrike1 wrote:
Have you ever considered changing the damage module stats to make them more thematic?

e.g. reflect laser cap usage by buffing the damage modifier on Heat Sinks and simultaneously nerfing their ROF bonus

edit: Or having different variants within the same racial type?

i.e. one that favours damage modifier and one that favours rate of fire


Wondering that too. Especially where faction mods are concerned, it would make me consider this-mod-or-that-mod situations more on which fits what I need over just getting what's cheapest at the moment. Having 2-5 carbon copy mods with different names isn't what I had in mind when CCP described how they wanted to tiericide mods in Eve.

Also, maybe it's not quite clear on what the word "tiericide" actually means since officer mods are basically doing what I thought tiericide was meant to correct? I guess the image I had in my head was that modules would be more diversity among stats and simultaneously avoid pairing mods in the same meta family together into (A=B)>(C=D)>(E=F) setups. Am I assuming the wrong thing here, because this pretty much leaves them in that position, with the only exception being the M0-5 mods? Actually, they also seemingly nerfed officer mods due to RoF being caped to 8.9% rather than the current 10.5% but the damage multipliers appear to actually be less as well.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#56 - 2016-02-25 21:47:40 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Luscius Uta wrote:
I was hoping you'd give some justice to Ballistic Control Systems by making their CPU use equal with other damage modules. A lot of fits on missile boats are currently very tight on CPU.


I disagree. Balance shouldn't involve making everything the same.


But if you look at the stats, everything else IS the same.. except CPU fitting requirement on BCS's. it's pretty noticeable.
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
#57 - 2016-03-03 03:41:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Sobaan Tali
Maybe my brain is just fried, but I'm a little confused about something that's been really bothering me. The RoF buff stat and how it's being shown here.

Fozzy, can you or whom ever wrote the spreadsheet you're showing us please clarify "Cycle Time Multiplier"? With these numbers (and my mathematical skill is admittedly horrible) I'm getting conflicting results when comparing them to damage modules current stats and I have a good feeling that I'm using the wrong method of conversion.

Odd hunch has me thinking these RoF buffs are actually the same ones we have now, not nerfed RoF buffs like I've been under the impression they are. Can you possibly show the RoF bonuses in the converted form as they appear in game?

Edit: Btw, just happen to do some number crunching in PyFa and noticed that selecting "Toggle view mode" changed the RoF bonus on the damage mods I was testing -- T2 and higher -- from "rate of fire bonus, 10.5%" to "speedMultiplier, 0.895". I'm gonna go on the assumption that the RoF bonuses are untouched for the most part and are the same on CCP Fozzy's spreadsheet as they are on TQ now. At least that's one question mark dealt with.

Still can't figure on what the point was to any of the (honestly marginal) changes made beyond T2 models; still a lot of duplicates with opposing names, still follows a tiered format, still no other reason to pick a lower meta unless you're slightly over-budget on CPU. I would say cost as well, but let's be honest: past T2 the only time better damage doesn't completely out-way cost in this case is when the two mods you are considering are separated by whether one's faction and one's officer grade.

I understand you want to help LP stores out that need it, but this is ridiculous. Look I hate to be the, "that guy," but we now have five BCS' and four DDA's that are literally identical save for name. Can at least get some of the twin-set mods to maybe differ by having one trade RoF for Volley and vice versa for the other? Something? I honestly would want someone to chime in and tell me to shut up because I have not a clue what I'm talking about. At this point, I'd rather be an idiot and wrong than a bitter ******* and right.

Rant over with, I do love you guys for all you guys at CCP do and keep doing. Keep'em coming. Go nuts and fly safe.

"Tomahawks?"

"----in' A, right?"

"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."

"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."

Justin Cody
War Firm
#58 - 2016-03-08 21:43:47 UTC
Agent Known wrote:
I think the officer damage modules need more of a buff to even consider using over the much cheaper faction variants ...not that they're used much now to start with.


Also clearly need deadspace damage mods...yeehaw Centii a-type heat sinks boiiiiss
Lara Divinity
Pidgeon Cartel
#59 - 2016-03-09 11:22:56 UTC
another nerf to drone damage amps dint that just happen 2 updates ago to with the gila nerfs good goin ccp more changes for the sake of changes is kinda funny tho how a game that been around for what 12 years now still seems to be unfinnishd n we r forced to be beta testers
Elah'n'matir
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2016-03-09 11:36:37 UTC
To the guys out here that say why would anyone use a t1 over a t2 if the cpu difference is that small and they lose X % dps.

The same reason they have been doing that since t2 was released : cause they don't have she skills to use t2 ;-)