Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Hello, ccp and all evers,
Congratulating firstly on happy 10th birthday, CHEERS！Whatever, it's a age worth celebrating for a game, and same for hopeful prospect.
In fact, I have been thinking about a question, what game genre should I classify eveonline as? MMO, SLG, STG or AVG, or life simulation game, or sandbox game, or just a chating game, oh maybe tab game is the best tag for eveonline. Then I forget that, because I think out of that the game genre is unnecessary for eveonline. The really significant things, the soul of eveonline is freedom. Because gameplayers can create more special ways to playing by themselves on a unconstrained game platform. No matter how other people thinking, the freedom of action, traveling, fighting and trading is the most attractive feature for me.
But one point I cant understand, the ships are most important above all i think, because we cant leave ships if we undock station, so why cant we modify and fit our ships more freely? Why almost all ships have been designed to be one or two specific roles? And why cant we change roles of a ship by some ways or costs.
So I design Slot Transfer Rigs, I think many ships will be far more interesting in this way. Some primary informations here below.

Name: Small/Medium/Large Slot Transfer

Description: This ship modification is designed to exchange ship slots between high & med, high & low, or med & low. Every this rig can only exchange one slot. ( note: every ship can be upgraded to 8 high, med or low slots maximally ).

Expense: Whatever(I hope have no expense)

Calibration cost: 50~75

Through the description, we can know that most of T1ships can fit 3 Slot Transfer Rigs, so u can exchange 3 slots freely on most of T1ships. And similarly, most of T2ships can fit 2 slot transfer rigs, so you can exchange 2 slots freely on T2ships. But all ships maximum numbers of high or med or low slots are still 8. By this change, we can fitting our ships more freely, and all ships can be more changeful.
Other hand, I hope ccp can abolish the rigs of monotonous attribute bonus, because that's so boring. I think the rigs have more interstiing use to ship.
Finally I want to say, the ships rebalance of Odyssey and previous all are sosososososososososoosoossosos boringgggggggggggggggggggggg！！！

ANNOUNCE IN ADVANCE: I will introduce another good idea about rigs and skill bonuses of ships in my next GOODIDEAS topic, LOOK OUT！

First, almost all of the balance and fairness of each ship is based on it's slots. They are the easiest thing to see, and can make or break a ship no matter how good it's stats are. I would also argue that each race as a default slot layout pattern, but honestly after tiericide I don't know if that's still true. Safe it to say, Amarr ships used to have the most lows, and caldari ships used to have the most mids, minnies fit the most guns on average, and gallente had the biggest drone bay (not a slot, but you get the gist). Now? Who knows.

All this said, especially in pvp, rigs are also important. Sacrificing a rig to, say, lose a low and fit an extra mid on my shield tanked harbinger would be an interesting idea, but performance wise I doubt the overall loss of that rig slot will make up for the change.

Still ... for diversities sake, I'd like to see something like this on sisi, just to get a feel for moving slots.

this basically. We have a working model of how hard it is to balance varyng slots already in game, it be the T3's.

Someone says nerf Tengu. I say which one since hybrid tengu can be described by many words, op is not one of them.

A big part the t3 issue is the nerf hammer is hard to apply. Most have thier "op" sub and slot setups. But that same t3 hull with a different sub setup and therefore different slots setup can be utter trash.

why we really don't need ships dropping utility highs for more tank or gank. Why ccp has thier setups as is now. They want you to pick either tank or gank, or run something in between that does neither very well.

I agree, in fact that was my initial assessment. Though I feel they shouldn't necessarily be expensive, because making things expensive really only takes it away from poorer players. But I'm thinking it should offer a penalty that will help balance in some way--and the tech 1 should have a stronger penalty than the tech 2. And it should cost 250 calibration.

"Uniqueness" as in suckage. Ships with slot layouts that uniquely suck should remain that way?

Using this rig already nerfs the boat compared with one that does not have that naturally sucking slot layout, in the form of 1 fewer rig slot. It's still uniquely suck, just not by as much. But this must not be, as only a select few are allowed good slot layouts, so that everybody and their mother fly them.

this is a case by case thing really.


A common rig on a shield boat could be EM resist rig for caldari. Usually does not fit in the mids after your run the SE(s) or ASB os SB, invul + thermal resist and the rest e-war (to include tackle gear) and prop mod so all slots taken.

So I take this new rig, fit it, take utility high to mid and shoehorn an EM resist module in. I am not nerfed by less 1 slot. One slot for many caldari is almost always a real nice to have is a resist rig. I'd say its almost damn near caldari law to have one on ships (besides drake maybe and I still like it on them too) lol. Whether a real deal resist rig, or this new rig that lets me fit one more mid module to be module based resist the end is the same. Moar resists.

With this new rig I lose nothing. I in fact get buffed nicely. I get 2 bene's from this.

1. The shield rig now a slot changer rig lets me run 1 more module resist to not have sig radius penalty. A small bene but it is there

2. Even a base stat passive resist amp has more resists than the resist rig. I get more resists from this upgrade.

Not always, I think the uniqueness is only for original ships. Because every ship have original design, this decide the uniqueness of ships, and we can only modify two or three slots at the expense of general rigs bonus or other improvements. So if one ship was designed suitably for me, I would never fit the slot transfer rigs.

Two or three re-allocated fitting slots can be worth more than ten rigs if chosen and fitted correctly.

Absolutely not. This must never happen. In fact, I'd willingly wager that it will never happen.

There are no words to express how terrible and broken this idea is, the absolute ruin it would bring upon the game and how you should feel for suggesting it. If you cannot understand this, I simply do not know what to say to you.

No. A thousand times no.

Oh, calm down plz man, just a discussion,
dont you want to experience this change?