Test Server Feedback

Indeed she does. Now, without downplaying anyone's contribution (and in particular not CCP Punkturis' contribution) then CCP karkur probably spends the most after-hours on actual coding of extra projects.

Sry this may be a little off topic but in the past few TQ patches have yall uploaded any prep code for the war deccing changes I have had a Bug with the wardeccing system on the live server that has cost me a very expensive ship I have submited a bug report petition and made a post on the forums about what happened here.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=109044&find=unread

Can anyone tell me the idea behind the target breaker ?, which can only be used in T1 ships and leaves a cruise with the scan resolution of a titan

Armor Adaptive Hardener I - Low slot. Armor Hardener that adjusts its resistance based on the damage received. Only one can be fitted. Just the tech I version now, but others will follow if this turns out well.

- Good. Best balanced when efficiency is between Energized Adaptive Membrane and Active Hardeners, unless the fitting stats are very different.

Extrinsic Damage Amplifier I & II - Low slot. A damage amplifier module for drones.

- Show some actual guts CCP! Don't balance weapons by making them all just the same, it's lazy, pathetic, and detrimental to diversity and versatily, both core gameplay values. Just make drone damage mods unique as high-slots. Have the art guys come up with a little dish-model for cool bonus points. But in low slots these mods won't be anything special at all. (drone boats prefer to tank here, or shield-tank with turret weapon mods preferred over drone mods, so they likely will either not be used at all, or be so much better then other weapon mods, they become a mandatory 'choice'. Both are BAD, so again: NEVER BALANCE BY MAKING EVERYTHING MORE THE SAME. It leads to min-maxing, with a few things used by everybody and the rest not used at all.

Small/Medium/Large/X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster I. Mid slot. A shield booster that gives a good boost, but has a very high capacitor need. Can use Cap Boosters as charge to negate the severe capacitor need. Only tech I version for now.

- Cool idea. But I can't wait for the next wave of shield vs. armor flames on the forums. I've seen many people prefer a version that only runs on cap-boosters though. Shieldboosting already is high-cap burst-tanking. When adding another 'tier' to this, make sure it's as different as possible so it can't become a total 'replacement'. Running on cap charges-only, will give it its own niche and that's the best way to do it.

MagSheath Target Breaker I - Mid slot. A module that has a chance of breaking the lock of ships targeting you, the chance increases the more ships target you at one time. Also breaks your locks. Reduces scan resolution significantly as a downside. Only one can be fitted at a time and the can not be fitted to capital ships.

- Meh. Sounds a bit like the poor Warp Core Stabilizer. A fun module (though perhaps a bit arbitrary and too much chance-based) allowing inventive tactics, but CCP not standing up enough to the verbose one-dimensionally 'tank&spank' players, to allow it a niche in PvP (not turning it into a mandatory 'choice' either).

Small/Medium/Large Overclocking Processor Unit I & II - A rig that increases the CPU output of your ship, at a cost of reduced shield recharge rate.

- Good

Light & Medium Web Drones - Light and medium versions of stasis webifying drones.

- Need to be more effective to be a valid choice. A problem shared with most other EW-drones. Ask CCP Diagoras for some stats about usage and balance accordingly, using a few iterations in the following months

Capacitor Battery edits - All capacitor batteries now also provide a defense against Energy Vampires (Nos) and Energy Neutralizer (Neut) effects. A portion of the effect is reflected back on the aggressor.

- Reflect back? Does that simply mean the effect of NOS and neuts are reduced? Or does it really mean the effect is occasionally refersed, because that seems not only a bit arbitrary, but downright silly. I'd much rather see Cap batteries shielding off an amount of cap off from the NOS and neuts (enough to keep low-cap stuff like hardeners running). Harder to implement, but gameplay-wise a much better move. Don't forget: chance based effects are BAD. Don't use them if not necessary. Players don't like them and for a good reason.

Easier to implement and also a good option would be making it a module that can restore a very large amount of cap (much more than cap injectors), but has a very long cycle time, so in most fights you are only likely to use it once, maybe twice. It's imperative that a capital version is implemented as well, so with good timing it becomes possible to counter the rather invincible Bhaalgorn+Archon combos.

I REALLY think the Tracking Disruptors also affecting missiles is a VERY BAD IDEA. I can't stress this enough and for me, as a +9 year vet, reading how that quote is worded is a massive face-palm.

• Missiles already have problems hitting fast, small ships for meaningful damage and most missile ships they need all their rigs just to be competitive. Heavy Missiles and very specific rocket fits are pretty much the only missiles viable in PvP, that should be proof enough. Turrets have tracking mods for both high and low slots, can be remote boosted even further AND can easily overcome transversal by kiting&sniping small ships at enough range. While I don't mind the differences between weapons, the huge lack of options for missiles should for now, veto ANY additional nerf to them.


• There is a very good reason why any effective ECM is divided over racials, because the second a module can be used to counter most of the enemies (turrets+missiles=huge majority of ships, drones are almost always a secondary weapon), it simply becomes a 'mandatory choice' and a blanket protection, opening the door to min-maxing, and unbalancing everything. If TD will also influence missiles almost every ship with 4 or more med-slots will equip them by default, and a lot of the 3-ones will use them as well.


• If tracking disruptors are currently underused, simply boost their effectiveness a bit. This, in contrary to making it apply to more weapon systems, would at least keep missiles for players as a counter against them.


• If missiles ever become balanced to the point where they could handle a counter (like making them better alpha weapons then projectikes, or only go redbox on hit), it would be much, MUCH better to add a new mod that is the individual counter for missiles. Maybe even a high-slot type, sacrificing dps for missile protection, with a missile, hybrid, projectile and laser variety (benefiting from ship bonuses).

I just realized that instead of being a buff to drone boats, webber scout drones just makes kiting even more OP as tactic.

Drone boats should receive bonuses to all drone effects.

Combined with the failure that is the new drone dmg module, I feel like drone pilots are treated like second class citizens.

There is alot of confusion with the cap batteries. Their description and attributes on SISSI indicate they're just Nuet/Nos resistant. People testing them indicate that the effect is partially cast back the aggressor. This was indicated in the dev blog as well.

Yes how exactly they work? U cannot switch off capacitor of a ship that uses these batteries? Or simply ifnu neut one of these ship a % of neuting is turned back to u?

For example if i should neut 100 of your cap... I neut 80 and 20 is drained from my cap?

H.

It looks like they are mutually stacking penalized on sisi, when do you plan to have build where they are not?


Also, could you answer question from old thread?