These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Tech 2 Microwarpdrive Bonuses

Author
Galmas
United System's Commonwealth
#21 - 2014-03-18 12:37:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Galmas
I support this. I would just like to see this whole thing extended to all t2 modules.

We have always found it pretty strange that there are meta 1..2...3...4...5 items where the meta 5 are quite often just plain worse than the meta 4. While they require more skill points are often more expensive and have a shiny t2 tag on their icon. They should actually be better. (not talking balancing here)

I think stream lining this meta 5 vs meta 4 would help the game a great deal and also give the proper appreciation to folks who train the skills that bit higher. Especially when looking at relatively new players. For 100M+ skill point chars it wont matter anyway...
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2014-03-19 16:49:13 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
meta-cide looks like a good idea for somewhere down the line

problem becomes with "meta-cide" is that T2 no longer serves a function, if every meta excels in a certain aspect, then they are all T2, because T2 is specialization, so they are either all T2, and require lvl 5 in skills to use anything other than meta 0, or there is no more T2 in which case one of the versions will still be preferable to all the others because it has the bonus that actually matters.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#23 - 2014-03-19 17:13:57 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
meta-cide looks like a good idea for somewhere down the line

problem becomes with "meta-cide" is that T2 no longer serves a function, if every meta excels in a certain aspect, then they are all T2, because T2 is specialization, so they are either all T2, and require lvl 5 in skills to use anything other than meta 0, or there is no more T2 in which case one of the versions will still be preferable to all the others because it has the bonus that actually matters.


you're a little off the mark there but i get the gist of it..
the T2 would just excel at the main function of the module so for webs it would be strength...
and people should be willing to train the lv5 skill for the improved attribute of the module ..and the extra fitting required.

the meta options would be just that adding options but not improving the main purpose of the module..
so for webs they would offer options like reduced cpu/cap .. offer improved range .. but would have less strength than the T2 and would have drawbacks like lower strength/higher cap usage depending on the bonus increase .. but would still have lower skill requirements ..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2014-03-19 17:43:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Nariya Kentaya
Harvey James wrote:
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
meta-cide looks like a good idea for somewhere down the line

problem becomes with "meta-cide" is that T2 no longer serves a function, if every meta excels in a certain aspect, then they are all T2, because T2 is specialization, so they are either all T2, and require lvl 5 in skills to use anything other than meta 0, or there is no more T2 in which case one of the versions will still be preferable to all the others because it has the bonus that actually matters.


you're a little off the mark there but i get the gist of it..
the T2 would just excel at the main function of the module so for webs it would be strength...
and people should be willing to train the lv5 skill for the improved attribute of the module ..and the extra fitting required.

the meta options would be just that adding options but not improving the main purpose of the module..
so for webs they would offer options like reduced cpu/cap .. offer improved range .. but would have less strength than the T2 and would have drawbacks like lower strength/higher cap usage depending on the bonus increase .. but would still have lower skill requirements ..

but thats the problem, people ALREADY only use the meta for webs BECAUSE of the long range, the strength is pointless because its already strong enough on the meta, and if you nerf the meta's strength, it becomes pointless to use because it cant slow anyone.

like i said, peopl will still just choose 1 version of the module, and thats the version with the best bonus.

its like ships with both a damage and resist bonus per level, people love them, whereas a ship with a repper bonus and tracking or optimal gets used as a gimmick once in a while but is never truly mainstream.
paritybit
Solarmark
#25 - 2014-03-19 18:34:46 UTC
There was a time when the meta MWD drops were much more rare. Then one day they started dropping from every other wreck and became dirt cheap. I don't remember which expansion that was. It does seem like they are a little too common.

But there's no excuse for increasing the speed by 20% (from 500% to 600%) or the overload bonus by 40% (from 50% to 70%).

An overloaded microwarpdrive is already pretty powerful. It's the difference between an average frigate going 3100 m/s without overload to suddenly bursting up to 4400 m/s. 1300 m/s is faster than most frigates will go with an afterburner, and this is an increase over the 3100 m/s velocity it already has. In most cases it's not possible to react to this in time to catch a fleeing target because the module cannot be instantly overloaded (it has a lengthy cycle time). If the bonus was 70% we'd be talking about another 520 m/s.

It probably translates a little more sanely into the 10mn variation with cruisers, but thought needs to be given to all facets here.

* all numbers rounded slightly (always down) for readability.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#26 - 2014-03-19 18:49:24 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Daichi Yamato wrote:
meta-cide looks like a good idea for somewhere down the line

problem becomes with "meta-cide" is that T2 no longer serves a function, if every meta excels in a certain aspect, then they are all T2, because T2 is specialization, so they are either all T2, and require lvl 5 in skills to use anything other than meta 0, or there is no more T2 in which case one of the versions will still be preferable to all the others because it has the bonus that actually matters.


u dnt think it could be done well?

its not like attack frigates obsoleted inties.

no, range is not the only defining factor of a web. web str is useful, hence serp web str bonus vs loki web range bonus. they both have their uses.

if a 60% web got nerfed range, i'd still see a use for it. Vindi's can still tackle a frig down for amazing hits
if a 10km web got nerfed str, i'd still see a use for it. lokis and rapiers (and now bloods) can still use it for range control
if a low cpu cost web got lower cap cost but slightly nerfed str and range, i could still use it when my amarr ships are strapped for cpu...and it would also be exactly what i recommend noobs to fly with their terrible fitting skills.

and if a T2 web got higher CPU cost, cap cost and cost more isk than other webs, i can still see a use for it when it has good strength and good range.

its not the typical T1 is generalised and T2 is specialised. it just becomes the other way round for mods. not really a big deal.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

The Djego
Hellequin Inc.
#27 - 2014-03-19 22:33:02 UTC
Meh the problems with the T2 mwds are in the game since 2008, with the QR changes(before that it did give more speed).

I would simply reduce the cap penalty to -12 or even -10%. The higher fitting costs and higher cap use are enough of a penalty already, making it at least a option on hulls that just use it to burn back to the gate or quicker aligns.

Improve discharge rigging: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=246166&find=unread

Cardano Firesnake
Fire Bullet Inc
#28 - 2014-03-20 08:31:47 UTC
I think T2 modules should be specialized on overheating.
Less heat damage and emission and more hitpoints and a greater bonus than Tech1.
Quite the same bonuses than meta4
More difficult to fit though .
So a full tech2 fitted ship overloaded could maintain overloading twice time than a Tech1 and a Tech3 (with the bonuses) more.

The tech 2 game play would be really different and interestening.

While factions and deepspace modules would be easier to fit or better while not overloaded.

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.

Lyonic
State War Academy
Caldari State
#29 - 2014-03-20 09:53:17 UTC
I fly ceptors like everyday, it's what im best at. The T2 MWD is really fail, as stated before. +1 to address this issue.
Smelly PirateWhore
Perkone
Caldari State
#30 - 2014-03-20 10:43:43 UTC
Actually i think you'll find that the main difference between the 2 is that the t2 uses more cap while active, but reduces your max cap less than the meta. Therefore when fitting my ships, if i intend to kite or use my mwd a lot, i'll use the meta because it will use less cap while active - though if i use my mwd simply for tackling or escaping and intend to have it switched off a majority of the time, i'll fit the t2 if i have the resources, because while inactive i have more cap with the t2 than with the meta
Cardano Firesnake
Fire Bullet Inc
#31 - 2014-03-20 16:12:13 UTC
Smelly PirateWhore wrote:
Actually i think you'll find that the main difference between the 2 is that the t2 uses more cap while active, but reduces your max cap less than the meta. Therefore when fitting my ships, if i intend to kite or use my mwd a lot, i'll use the meta because it will use less cap while active - though if i use my mwd simply for tackling or escaping and intend to have it switched off a majority of the time, i'll fit the t2 if i have the resources, because while inactive i have more cap with the t2 than with the meta


2% really?

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.

Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
#32 - 2014-03-20 17:28:14 UTC
Cardano Firesnake wrote:
Smelly PirateWhore wrote:
Actually i think you'll find that the main difference between the 2 is that the t2 uses more cap while active, but reduces your max cap less than the meta. Therefore when fitting my ships, if i intend to kite or use my mwd a lot, i'll use the meta because it will use less cap while active - though if i use my mwd simply for tackling or escaping and intend to have it switched off a majority of the time, i'll fit the t2 if i have the resources, because while inactive i have more cap with the t2 than with the meta


2% really?



I was under the impression everyone fit their ships like that... you don't?
BAJRAN BALI
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2014-03-20 18:09:47 UTC
Capacitor: -17% vs Capacitor: -19% can be huge difference when taking skills into account. I see no real reason to chance t2 mwd's without reconsidering all the other prop mods along with them. I fly with my t2 mwd for 2 reasons... 1 better cap and 2 USE ALL THE FITTING!!!

YouTube: kds119 Twitter: @realkds119 Blog: derptw.blogspot.com

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#34 - 2014-03-21 01:04:05 UTC
BAJRAN BALI wrote:
Capacitor: -17% vs Capacitor: -19% can be huge difference when taking skills into account. I see no real reason to chance t2 mwd's without reconsidering all the other prop mods along with them. I fly with my t2 mwd for 2 reasons... 1 better cap and 2 USE ALL THE FITTING!!!


you realise that T2 mwd uses more cap so that 2% is useless in effect ... so meta 4 uses less cap overall and has better fittings ..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
#35 - 2014-03-21 01:24:10 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
BAJRAN BALI wrote:
Capacitor: -17% vs Capacitor: -19% can be huge difference when taking skills into account. I see no real reason to chance t2 mwd's without reconsidering all the other prop mods along with them. I fly with my t2 mwd for 2 reasons... 1 better cap and 2 USE ALL THE FITTING!!!


you realise that T2 mwd uses more cap so that 2% is useless in effect ... so meta 4 uses less cap overall and has better fittings ..



You realize that is only a benefit on ships that permarun their MWD. If you intend on using it sparingly the T2 is better.
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#36 - 2014-03-21 10:34:29 UTC
Tsobai Hashimoto wrote:
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
I see no reason that player produced T2 modules should always be better than rare rat drops. (T2 MWDs aren't strictly worse than meta ones, but I'll concede that they are generally worse).

Likewise I see no reason that faction modules should always be better than T2.



Rare? RARE? its the only thing anyone ever fits or uses, including massive throw away T1 frigs in FW and there is an endless supply of them in Jita for about......20k isk each!

its sick......

honestly, nerf the drop rate on them slightly, and give the T2 just a tad bit better cap use and it would change things a lot for the better



I don't think you realise quite how quickly the T2 ones can be vomited out if there was a reason to do so.

On ONE character with imperfect production skills and no POS I am currently producing 54 T2 1600mm plates (one of the longest build time T2 mods) per 24 hours.

Get people with a POS and ten lines (not nine) on each of three characters and you are looking at 240 per day of that module. IIRC these MWDs are faster to build than that, so maybe 360/day.


So yes, meta ones are comparitively rare. Noone can produce even 60 of them a day, much less 360. (IIRC you get about one per hour of missioning if you loot which most people do not).

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Tribe O' Brute
Lightning Strikes Thrice
#37 - 2014-03-22 12:56:13 UTC
Personally I hate if things become more linear in EVE. In some cases it's nice when meta4 is better than T2. It make people think better before blindly fitting everything T2. For me it gives the game more depth.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#38 - 2014-03-22 13:33:57 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
I see no reason that player produced T2 modules should always be better than rare rat drops. (T2 MWDs aren't strictly worse than meta ones, but I'll concede that they are generally worse).

Likewise I see no reason that faction modules should always be better than T2.

I agree with this. Problem is, they are not rare drops.

The only thing that needs fixing is actually the drop rate of meta level stuff.

Remove standings and insurance.

Cardano Firesnake
Fire Bullet Inc
#39 - 2014-03-24 06:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Cardano Firesnake
Tribe O' Brute wrote:
Personally I hate if things become more linear in EVE. In some cases it's nice when meta4 is better than T2. It make people think better before blindly fitting everything T2. For me it gives the game more depth.


You can let people thinking by themselves without creating modules Tech2 worse than Meta 4.
if you look at Factional and Deep Space items you can see that their meta levels are different and that their statistices are very differents.
Some are easier to fit, some take less capacitor, some give better signature. Here should be the choice. Why a Tech2 item should be worse than a meta4 in every way: Same Signature, Same Speed Bonus more capasitor use, a capacitor reduction very close (The 2% defference do not overcome the capacitor activation cost), more skills needed and a bigger price...
Seriously If I celarly see an impact between deepsace modules and the meta4 the difference between meta4 and Tech 2 MWD really doesn't worth...

Tech2 Microwarpdrives and Afterburners should be modified to give players a real reason to use them.

Posted - 2010.07.01 11:24:00 - [4] Erase learning skills, remap all SP. That's all.

O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2014-03-24 11:11:56 UTC
love the idea but why not have the same activation as a meta 4? that would fix the problem
Previous page123Next page