These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Possible Winter 2011 changes (Exact stats)

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#321 - 2011-10-26 19:29:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Denidil wrote:
Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease?
If they're completely balanced against each other… nothing… initially.¹

However, it would change how a fixed-number modifier to any of those stats given by a module (or skill… although I don't think there is anyone that does) influences the ship as a whole and could therefore potentially shift what kinds of modules are beneficial to fit.

For instance, ye olde 1600mm tungsten plate adds a fixed amount of mass to your ship, thus making it less agile. If you do what you suggest — increase inertia while decreasing mass — that mass addition will suddenly be relatively larger than it was before. Instead of adding, say, 10% to your ships mass, the same single plate might now add 15%. This makes the plate option less attractive, while increasing the usefulness of trimark rigs (since they give a percentage increase, which is equally large no matter how much you fiddle with mass and inertia). Conversely, adding mass while reducing the inertia mod means that the mass addition from a plate becomes smaller, percent-wise, and thus has less effect on overall agility.

The same thing would be true for agility modules, but as far as I can recall, they all give percent-bonuses, so there's no “other” option to choose between.



¹ …and if they're not balanced against each other, then it's a matter of what the end product is: higher than before → less agile; lower than before → more agile. Beyond that, the question of how fixed-amount modifiers affect the whole thing is the same.
Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#322 - 2011-10-26 19:38:11 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Denidil wrote:
Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease?


http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Acceleration

If you increase inertia (I) by 5% and reduce mass (M) by 5%, you get a tiny improvement. (1.05 * .95 ) = .9975



that's what i figured. raising the inertia modifier of blasterboats makes no sense to me, unless they then go and decrease the mass.

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
Aineko Macx
#323 - 2011-10-26 19:44:53 UTC
Very interesting changes. I'm quite sure not all of it is balanced, but things are moving in the right direction.

iveeCore 3.0: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
Yvan Ratamnim
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#324 - 2011-10-26 19:45:56 UTC
Borlag Crendraven wrote:

It'll still be cheap considering that losing the faction equivalent has you gaining pretty much nothing in insurance, whereas you get nearly everything back when losing a regular t1 ship, regardless of the tier. The initial cost doesn't make much difference if it's replaced simply by buying new modules which is what you can pretty much do here.


You do realize faction ships arent supposed to be better than t2 right? (recons) ... faction are supposed to be between t1 and t2... hence the fact they require like 0 skills
Ur235
Appetite 4 Destruction
#325 - 2011-10-26 20:09:46 UTC
Damn if this is true then im so happy I maxed out all my Gallente gunnery and spaceship skills all those years ago

hmm
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#326 - 2011-10-26 20:14:59 UTC
Yvan Ratamnim wrote:
Borlag Crendraven wrote:

It'll still be cheap considering that losing the faction equivalent has you gaining pretty much nothing in insurance, whereas you get nearly everything back when losing a regular t1 ship, regardless of the tier. The initial cost doesn't make much difference if it's replaced simply by buying new modules which is what you can pretty much do here.


You do realize faction ships arent supposed to be better than t2 right? (recons) ... faction are supposed to be between t1 and t2... hence the fact they require like 0 skills


Of course, but the discussion was about the price, which is what I commented on. On t1 ships the initial price of a would be gank boat is insignificant when you get pretty much everything back automagically.
Frothgar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#327 - 2011-10-26 20:21:12 UTC
I'm really encouraged when looking at the initial concept of the Tier 3 BCs. The bane of ships for a long time has always been the Bigger = Better approach within the tier systems. You really can't argue with the notion that Tier 1 BCs are among the least used ships in the game.

I really hope CCP sticks to the flavor we're seeing in the current Tier 3 BCs in that they have some advantages over the Tier 2 ships (Range, Speed), but also some serious disadvantages (Tracking, Effective HP)

They look genuinely GOOD so far.

Higher Tier shouldn't just be a cookie cutter More fitting, More EHP, more damage over the previous tier. There should really be radically different roles as you go along.

So yeah, really happy, really encouraged by what I'm seeing so far. Just please stay with this inspired bit of brilliance. Last thing anyone wants is to have these ships simply bigger better versious of Tier 2 BCs, thatl just kill all the others dynamics. You saw what introducing Tier 2 BCs did to Both Tier 1 and Command ships.

mkint
#328 - 2011-10-26 20:28:47 UTC
Frothgar wrote:
I'm really encouraged when looking at the initial concept of the Tier 3 BCs. The bane of ships for a long time has always been the Bigger = Better approach within the tier systems. You really can't argue with the notion that Tier 1 BCs are among the least used ships in the game.

I really hope CCP sticks to the flavor we're seeing in the current Tier 3 BCs in that they have some advantages over the Tier 2 ships (Range, Speed), but also some serious disadvantages (Tracking, Effective HP)

They look genuinely GOOD so far.

Higher Tier shouldn't just be a cookie cutter More fitting, More EHP, more damage over the previous tier. There should really be radically different roles as you go along.

So yeah, really happy, really encouraged by what I'm seeing so far. Just please stay with this inspired bit of brilliance. Last thing anyone wants is to have these ships simply bigger better versious of Tier 2 BCs, thatl just kill all the others dynamics. You saw what introducing Tier 2 BCs did to Both Tier 1 and Command ships.


Um... so instead they are releasing bigger better versions of the tier 1 BC's? Buh bye Brutix. Was nice knowing you.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#329 - 2011-10-26 20:30:22 UTC
  • Atron
  • agility: 2.92 => 3.066

  • Celestis
  • agility: 0.565 => 0.59325

    • Intertia =/= agility
    Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron.
    Is more agility better?
    Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed?
    Frothgar
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #330 - 2011-10-26 20:35:30 UTC
    mkint wrote:
    Frothgar wrote:
    I'm really encouraged when looking at the initial concept of the Tier 3 BCs. The bane of ships for a long time has always been the Bigger = Better approach within the tier systems. You really can't argue with the notion that Tier 1 BCs are among the least used ships in the game.

    I really hope CCP sticks to the flavor we're seeing in the current Tier 3 BCs in that they have some advantages over the Tier 2 ships (Range, Speed), but also some serious disadvantages (Tracking, Effective HP)

    They look genuinely GOOD so far.

    Higher Tier shouldn't just be a cookie cutter More fitting, More EHP, more damage over the previous tier. There should really be radically different roles as you go along.

    So yeah, really happy, really encouraged by what I'm seeing so far. Just please stay with this inspired bit of brilliance. Last thing anyone wants is to have these ships simply bigger better versious of Tier 2 BCs, thatl just kill all the others dynamics. You saw what introducing Tier 2 BCs did to Both Tier 1 and Command ships.


    Um... so instead they are releasing bigger better versions of the tier 1 BC's? Buh bye Brutix. Was nice knowing you.



    Go play with Pyfa a bit. The gallente one does similar damage albeit at better range and with 25% of the tracking of a gank fit brutix. It also has almost the same EHP as a plate gank Brutix. I agree the Tier 1 BCs bring nothing to the table compared to the Tier2 ones, they really need a role.

    The Tier3 stats have some serious advantages and disadvantages over the Tier2 counterpars. (1/2 to 2/3 of the tank, 20% of the tracking, better range, and speed)

    Its a major step in the right direction, but they shouldn't stop there.

    stoicfaux
    #331 - 2011-10-26 20:37:02 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
    Denidil wrote:
    Tippia: what would the result of a interial modifier increase be when combined with a mass decrease?


    Acceleration formula: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Acceleration

  • Brutix
  • agility: 0.704 => 0.7392
  • maxVelocity: 145.0 => 155.0

    • At Skills 0, according to pyfa, assuming I haven't pooched the extrapolations:
    Brutix: 21.5 seconds to reach 90% velocity (130.5m/s).
    New Brutix: 18.1 seconds to reach 130.5m/s (which is 84% of max velocity)
    Talos: 6.5 seconds to reach 130.5m/s (62% of max velocity)

    At Skills V:
    Brutix: 14.5 seconds to reach 90% velocity (162.9m/s)
    New Brutix: 12.2 seconds to reach 162.9 m/s (which is 84% of max velocity)


    Skills V + 100 MWD II
    Brutix: 69.2 seconds to reach 90% velocity (2581.2m/s)
    New Brutix: 58.2 seconds to reach 2581.2 m/s (84% of max velocity)

    edit:
    Skills V + 10 MWD II
    Brutix: 20.0 seconds to reach 90% (or 1000.8m/s)
    New Brutix: 16.8 to reach 1000.8m/s (or 84%)

    edit2: Added Talos to initial base entry.

    Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
    mkint
    #332 - 2011-10-26 20:38:31 UTC
    DarkAegix wrote:
  • Atron
  • agility: 2.92 => 3.066

  • Celestis
  • agility: 0.565 => 0.59325

    • Intertia =/= agility
    Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron.
    Is more agility better?
    Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed?

    That's what's not clear. In most places "inertia" and "agility" are used interchangeably. In those cases, lower is better, the math of which can be seen elsewhere in this thread (actual maneuverability uses agility and mass.) And checking on TQ for the atron: "INERTIA MODIFIER 2.92 x". So yes, in this data dump, it looks like most gallente ships are getting nerfed. Plus many others. I really really really freakin' hope this is wrong. Every last bit of feedback from players was that they need agility to be BUFFED, not NERFED.

    Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #333 - 2011-10-26 20:44:07 UTC
    mkint wrote:
    Um... so instead they are releasing bigger better versions of the tier 1 BC's?

    Not really, different weapons sizes and the drawbacks from that as well as potentially cost might leave tier 1 BC's unaffected. Besides tier 1's are mostly obsoleted by the tier 2's as is. I'd be more concerned about their effect on the tier 2 BC's. There is one notable exception.
    mkint wrote:
    Buh bye Brutix. Was nice knowing you.

    Agreed. With a 10% web bonus/lvl, I'd imagine there would be little the Brutix is used for that the Talos can't do better.
    Tippia
    Sunshine and Lollipops
    #334 - 2011-10-26 20:51:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
    ******* idiotic forum software Evil
    DarkAegix wrote:
  • Atron
  • agility: 2.92 => 3.066

  • Celestis
  • agility: 0.565 => 0.59325

    • Intertia =/= agility
    Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron.
    Is more agility better?
    Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed?
    Again…

    What the data dump calls agility is actually called Inertia Modifier in the item database. Cf. Atron: Inertia Modifier 2.92 and Celestis: Inertia Modifier 0.565.

    You want the inertia modifier to be as low as possible, since it's multiplied together with the ship's mass to give the final agility (or inertia score, or whatever you want to call it). Lower is better. So why does the “hello, I move like a cow” Celestis have a lower (presumably better) imod than the nippy little Atron? Because the Celestis has a mass that is an order of magnitude larger.

    Atron: Inertia Mod 2.92 × Mass 1,164,000 kg → 3,398,880 “inertia score”.
    Celestis: Inertia Mod 0.565 × Mass 12,070,000 kg → 6,819,550 “inertia score”.

    Again, lower is better, so the Atron is about twice as agile as the Celestis. The new stats mean that both ships have their inertia mods (and, as a result, their inertia scores) increased by 5 percent. This makes them ~4.8 percent less agile than they are right now.

    As stoicfaux shows above, though, the time to a specific speed is indeed lower, but that is due to the increased speed counteracting this agility nerf — it would have been even quicker without the agility change. Agility nerf + speed buff = faster straight-line speed, worse align and orbit speed.
    Zagam
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #335 - 2011-10-26 21:00:41 UTC
    I'm not an expert on Gallente ships (by any means), but for comparisons between tier 1/2/3 ships, lets take a look at Minmatar BS.

    Typhoon - Tier 1. Incredible tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow. (PvE focused)
    Tempest - Tier 2. Moderate tank, mixed weapon platform, focus on guns, good DPS, moderately agile. (PvP or PvE)
    Maelstrom - Tier 3. Good tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, slow. (PvP or PvE)

    Each has their own role, but each tier gives an incremental improvement in DPS and skill requirements.

    With Minmatar BC, it looks to break down like this:

    Cyclone - Tier 1. Moderate-to-good (active) tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow-ish. (PvE)
    Hurricane - Tier 2. Moderate-to-poor (undefined) tank, gun focused platform, good DPS, moderate speed. (PvE or PvP)
    Tornado - Tier 3. Poor to terribad tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, fast speed. (PvP)

    They look to be following in appropriate footsteps.
    Zagam
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #336 - 2011-10-26 21:02:49 UTC
    Tippia wrote:
    ******* idiotic forum software Evil
    DarkAegix wrote:
  • Atron
  • agility: 2.92 => 3.066

  • Celestis
  • agility: 0.565 => 0.59325

    • Intertia =/= agility
    Notice how the Celestis (A cruiser) has a lower base "agility" when compared to the Atron.
    Is more agility better?
    Is agility of Gallente ships being buffed?
    Again…

    What the data dump calls agility is actually called Inertia Modifier in the item database. Cf. Atron: Inertia Modifier 2.92 and Celestis: Inertia Modifier 0.565.

    You want the inertia modifier to be as low as possible, since it's multiplied together with the ship's mass to give the final agility (or inertia score, or whatever you want to call it). Lower is better. So why does the “hello, I move like a cow” Celestis have a lower (presumably better) imod than the nippy little Atron? Because the Celestis has a mass that is an order of magnitude larger.

    Atron: Inertia Mod 2.92 × Mass 1,164,000 kg → 3,398,880 “inertia score”.
    Celestis: Inertia Mod 0.565 × Mass 12,070,000 kg → 6,819,550 “inertia score”.

    Again, lower is better, so the Atron is about twice as agile as the Celestis. The new stats mean that both ships have their inertia mods (and, as a result, their inertia scores) increased by 5 percent. This makes them ~4.8 percent less agile than they are right now.

    As stoicfaux shows above, though, the time to a specific speed is indeed lower, but that is due to the increased speed counteracting this agility nerf — it would have been even quicker without the agility change. Agility nerf + speed buff = faster straight-line speed, worse align and orbit speed.

    Maybe that is exactly CCP's intent. Much of the complaints about blaster boats is their slow speed to close into blaster range. These changes help to resolve that, along with the tracking, but also ensures that they don't become OP by nerfing their align and orbit time.
    stoicfaux
    #337 - 2011-10-26 21:03:43 UTC
    Tippia wrote:
    As stoicfaux shows above, though, the time to a specific speed is indeed lower, but that is due to the increased speed counteracting this agility nerf — it would have been even quicker without the agility change. Agility nerf + speed buff = faster straight-line speed, worse align and orbit speed.

    Speed is a big factor. So in case you all missed my 2nd edit in my previous numbers post, and for those of you worried about obsoleting the Brutix, let me be clear:

    At Skills 0, according to pyfa, assuming I haven't pooched the extrapolations:
    Brutix: 21.5 seconds to reach 90% velocity (130.5m/s).
    New Brutix: 18.1 seconds to reach 130.5m/s (which is 84% of max velocity)
    Talos: ** 6.5 ** seconds to reach 130.5m/s (62% of max velocity)

    The slightly more massive Talos's base agility (.56) and speed (210m/s) versus the Brutix's base agility (.704) and speed (145m/s) might need to be tweaked somewhat.

    Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
    Tippia
    Sunshine and Lollipops
    #338 - 2011-10-26 21:05:43 UTC
    Zagam wrote:
    Maybe that is exactly CCP's intent. Much of the complaints about blaster boats is their slow speed to close into blaster range. These changes help to resolve that, along with the tracking, but also ensures that they don't become OP by nerfing their align and orbit time.
    Yup. It should also let them coast for a bit longer if when they get webbed and scrammed, since that higher inertia makes them harder to stop quickly.
    Tyberius Franklin
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #339 - 2011-10-26 21:09:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
    Zagam wrote:
    I'm not an expert on Gallente ships (by any means), but for comparisons between tier 1/2/3 ships, lets take a look at Minmatar BS.

    Typhoon - Tier 1. Incredible tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow. (PvE focused)
    Tempest - Tier 2. Moderate tank, mixed weapon platform, focus on guns, good DPS, moderately agile. (PvP or PvE)
    Maelstrom - Tier 3. Good tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, slow. (PvP or PvE)

    Each has their own role, but each tier gives an incremental improvement in DPS and skill requirements.

    With Minmatar BC, it looks to break down like this:

    Cyclone - Tier 1. Moderate-to-good (active) tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow-ish. (PvE)
    Hurricane - Tier 2. Moderate-to-poor (undefined) tank, gun focused platform, good DPS, moderate speed. (PvE or PvP)
    Tornado - Tier 3. Poor to terribad tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, fast speed. (PvP)

    They look to be following in appropriate footsteps.


    If we're talking T1 nonfaction, how can you consider the typhoon slow? Isn't it one of the fastest nonfaction T1 BS's if not THE fastest? Same for the Tempest, which I think is actually slower and less agile than the Typhoon so far as base stats are concerned. I'll leave comments on it's PvP capacity to others with more experience.

    Edit: If I recall a torp fit Typhoon has good potential DPS and can field a decent tank at the same time, wouldn't really relegate it to PvE focused.
    Zagam
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #340 - 2011-10-26 21:12:20 UTC
    Tyberius Franklin wrote:
    Zagam wrote:
    I'm not an expert on Gallente ships (by any means), but for comparisons between tier 1/2/3 ships, lets take a look at Minmatar BS.

    Typhoon - Tier 1. Incredible tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow. (PvE focused)
    Tempest - Tier 2. Moderate tank, mixed weapon platform, focus on guns, good DPS, moderately agile. (PvP or PvE)
    Maelstrom - Tier 3. Good tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, slow. (PvP or PvE)

    Each has their own role, but each tier gives an incremental improvement in DPS and skill requirements.

    With Minmatar BC, it looks to break down like this:

    Cyclone - Tier 1. Moderate-to-good (active) tank, mixed weapon platform, moderate DPS, slow-ish. (PvE)
    Hurricane - Tier 2. Moderate-to-poor (undefined) tank, gun focused platform, good DPS, moderate speed. (PvE or PvP)
    Tornado - Tier 3. Poor to terribad tank, gun-focused platform, great DPS, fast speed. (PvP)

    They look to be following in appropriate footsteps.


    If we're talking T1 nonfaction, how can you consider the typhoon slow? Isn't it one of the fastest nonfaction T1 BS's if not THE fastest? Same for the Tempest, which I think is actually slower and less agile than the Typhoon so far as base stats are concerned. I'll leave comments on it's PvP capacity to others with more experience.

    The typhoon is also almost always armor-tanked, which adds to its mass and inertia, while the Tempest is usually shield-tanked.