Player Features and Ideas Discussion

:Edit: I answered a large set of questions from the thread on April 8th

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!

I'm curious as to why the low-slot, non-cap-using TEs are still better in this iteration than the mid-slot, cap-using TCs, especially considering this statement?

TE's - ouch!

I agree they can be over powering (especially on hulls like the Talos) at times but this will pretty much kill the only advantage the minnies get with their weapon systems - nice falloff.

Now they will have the worst damage and not the best range. Any thoughts on uping their dps or base range to at least keep them competive?


EDIT- Nevermind I'm all for this now that I've thought about it some more. Bring it on!!

If it aint broke, DON'T fix it!


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

This change affects falloff and optimal bonuses equally, so it doesn't decrease Minmatar falloff relative to any other ship that fits TEs. Minmatar feel the pain mainly because they have a lot of ships that shield tank and use extra lows for TEs.

These are broke, so we're fixing them.

CAN WE HAVE A POTION BOOSTER FOR IMMUNITY TO ECM JAMMERS? I HAVE PUT A LOT OF THOUGHT INTO THIS BUT WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT. A POTION FOR STOPPING ECM WILL MAKE UP FOR LOSING TRACKING ENHANCING. THAT IS MY THOUGHTS ON THE SUBJECT AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME.

This is the post I've been waiting for.
Grow a pair and get close you sissies

Cynabal nerf? check.
No more people trying to kite in Thorax hulls? check.
Significantly less reliable Tier3 BCs? Check.
Significant scan res nerf for RSBs? Check.

This is a good development.

If TEs are so good why do fits pressed for low slots never give up a damage mod for them? You dont see armor ships with 1x damage mod/1x TE, its all double damage mod. You often see people flying with 3x damage mod 1x TE on shield fits - you never ever see 3x TE/1x damage mod.

Not only that, but tracking disruptors are still at -48% optimal and -48% falloff.

A single TD is 48%. No number of tracking enhancers on your ship will let you counter this TD. You can take a cane, and fill every low slot with a tracking enhancer, then TD it and your range is still less than when you started. The situation is even worse on laser ships where TDs have full effectiveness but TEs are only half as effective.

A cane with 6 TEs being tracking disrupted from an unbonused hull still has only 80% of the range of a cane with 0 TEs and no TD on it.

I can live with these changes as long as you've stopped the silly notion of TE/TD and othe tracking type of modules affecting missiles!


Edit- are you going to make the TD bonus' the same number so they cancel each other out?