These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Hyperion Feedback Thread] Wormhole Effect Rebalance

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
#81 - 2014-08-06 23:50:59 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Aquila Sagitta wrote:
...


I'd imagaine both these ships would be armor tanked with webs and points in the mid. Still a weak tank but one of these would be able to take out a frig fleet in seconds. Straight


Not sayin those fits are good by any means just threw them together to get a point across. ScyFI is decent with armor tank ~1kdps ~2k m/s unlinked, and ~36k armor ehp

Blue-Fire Best Fire
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#82 - 2014-08-06 23:51:03 UTC
These changes seem fine for the most part.
I think the Wolf Rayet loses out tbh

1 thing though, bombs need a HP increase in red giants in order for that bonus to be good.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Meytal
Doomheim
#83 - 2014-08-06 23:59:31 UTC
(black hole changes)

Not bad. They'll need to be experienced to make a final judgement, but on paper the changes look very interesting. It did always seem you like you intended them to be high-speed brawling systems, and these changes would indeed seem to reinforce that idea.

Somewhat related, additional missle/armour combinations would be nice. Perhaps a new pirate faction based on Minmatar + (?) that uses missiles and armour?


(magnetar changes)

The reason they're so popular, as you guys undoubtedly already know, is that the damage bonuses don't apply to Sleepers. If you make system effects apply to Sleepers again, and then perhaps reduce the magnitudes a touch for some (such as damage bonus in Magnetars, and armour penalty in Pulsars), it should lower desirability somewhat for these systems above all others and bring them back into relation with other system effects.

Not strictly Magnetar-related though related to the above, but if Sleepers had half of their armour HP changed to shield HP, Pulsars wouldn't need to be touched if you then apply effects to Sleepers.


(red giant changes)

The bomb attention makes perfect sense, considering the other bonuses, so this sounds great. I also wonder if bomb explosion velocity would be suitable for tweaking here as well.


(wolf-rayet changes)

The biggest problem with frigates in W-space is that they pop so easily. To encourage smaller ships, if you were able to decrease the sig radius even more for frigate- and destroyer-class ships, they might see more use due to being much harder to hit.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#84 - 2014-08-07 00:09:18 UTC
Meytal wrote:
(black hole changes)

(wolf-rayet changes)

The biggest problem with frigates in W-space is that they pop so easily. To encourage smaller ships, if you were able to decrease the sig radius even more for frigate- and destroyer-class ships, they might see more use due to being much harder to hit.


That'd potentially make them unkillable in anything but a rapid light caracal with multiple web support.

The Wolf-Rayet does lose out. Overall these are good changes.

Id' be scary to see the HP's on ships in a wolf-rayet now though :-/

Yaay!!!!
Michael1995
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#85 - 2014-08-07 00:29:03 UTC
So from reading the wormhole effect changes, you'll be removing the targeting range bonus on pulsars?

Any reasoning behind that?

Selling WH CFC Standings 10b/month for +10 with: Lazerhawks, Hard Knocks, Overwatch This, Many Vacancies, Golden Showers, Friendly Probes, Isogen Memed.

Join up for swag C3 Gila/Osprey ratting fleets daily! We also rent C2s out with CV effect!
Serith Ellecon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2014-08-07 00:30:42 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Gorski Car wrote:
Does the wolf rayet small weapon damage bonus apply to rapid light missiles?


Yes, since it applies to the light missiles themselves.

Didn't apply to rockets on a destroyer when I lived in one...

But yeah, these changes seem ok.

Inappropriate signature added.  CCP Notarealdev.
forsot
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#87 - 2014-08-07 00:39:36 UTC
One thing about the wolf raynt that has come to mind these changes nerf the unique buff they gave to active tanks. I am assuming you are removing the resist buff in to make way for a buff to capital reps of some form, however unlike pulsars caps armor caps in a wolf raynt can be difficult but can easily be capped out by a medium sized fleet while you are giving the heavily used armor meta of wh-space the biggest buff they have ever seen. Between having almost capital level ehp t3s will also have the sig of destroyers/frigs. I suspect most groups will avoid them like pulsars are now only instead of for being too weak and risking mass losses, but not wanting to get locked in a stalemate where both sides cannot kill anything.
Daenika
Chambers of Shaolin
#88 - 2014-08-07 00:43:27 UTC
Herm...I'm concerned about the Cataclysmic Variable changes on RR logi gangs.

Here's an example of an RR Guardian we've used before for both PvE and PvP:

Quote:
[Guardian, Fleet Guardian]
Armor EM Hardener II
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Dark Blood Reactor Control Unit
Damage Control II
Armor Thermic Hardener II

10MN Afterburner II
Conjunctive Radar ECCM Scanning Array I

Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer
Large 'Regard' Remote Capacitor Transmitter
Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer
Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer
Large 'Regard' Remote Capacitor Transmitter
Large 'Solace' Remote Armor Repairer

Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Anti-Kinetic Pump II


It has a total cap deficit of -69.9 GJ/s with all V skills and everything running. Cap regen peaks at +18.7 GJ/s. A single incoming meta cap transfer provides +64.8 GJ/s, giving the hull a net cap of +13.6 GJ/s.

Now, a C5 Cataclysmic after the change provides +30% cap regen (1.86/1.43), but a 43% reduction in the potency of remote cap transfers. That means base regen goes up to +24.3 GJ/s, while the incoming transfer bonus drops to +36.9 GJ/s. Net is +61.2, meaning the fit has a net cap of -8.7 GJ/s, or about a minute of endurance.

The problem is, even cruiser-sized logi gangs get the overwhelming majority of their cap from transfers.

The weird part is how much more powerful Triage carriers become. Spider coolcats are basically dead in Cataclysmics, but the cap bonus and remote rep bonus make Archons freakin ridiculous. Our standard site fit goes from ~2m cap stable with 3 remote reps, a remote cap, and a local rep running (in triage) to stable for about 3 days. Basically, Cataclysmics don't work with spider logi or spider capitals, but solo logi (including triage carriers) become amazing very quickly. Makes PvE a flat pain (because of those sleeper neuts), but PvP in there could get very interesting. RR gangs (that aren't based on trading cap) are going to become even more powerful as well.
Severn VonKarr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2014-08-07 00:45:06 UTC
So first, there already are fast missile boats. Then CCP creates the Mordu's legion ships, and now an entire effect is being tweaked to further this approach. I'm not sure I understand the obsession. Missiles as a weapon system do not do as much damage as guns. With npcs not being effected by Wspace effects, gun boats will be even less effective in pve as they will not be able to web npcs as effectively and the missile bonuses, although improving damage application, do nothing to compensate for the significantly lower base damage of missiles as a weapon system. For pvp, missiles still won't be a great choice as the increase in missile speed is not proportional to the increase in ship speed. People will still easily outrun missiles. Also, with these bonuses matching the strengths of an existing group of ships, the Mordu's Legion ships will just be broken in one of these.

If a speedy environment is the goal, CCP should look at existing speedy ship fittings/strategies. Also of note is that speed is not normally a strategy that works for pve. Tank and range are typical approaches. So any attempt at improving the speed in these will need to be able to make speed viable for pve as well. So considering the typical kiting strategies, there will need to be bonuses for gun systems that allow them to apply damage as well when moving at speed, so tracking bonuses that scale with the speed bonuses. All kiting strategies focus on staying out of tackle range, so relevant bonuses: low inertia for quick turns; reduced scram and web range; increased weapon, warp disrupt and possibly ewar range.
Daenika
Chambers of Shaolin
#90 - 2014-08-07 00:45:06 UTC
Meytal wrote:
(red giant changes)

The bomb attention makes perfect sense, considering the other bonuses, so this sounds great. I also wonder if bomb explosion velocity would be suitable for tweaking here as well.


Bombs don't have explosion velocity, only explosion radius.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#91 - 2014-08-07 01:12:19 UTC
Fozzie, if you can poke Karkur or anyone else in UI, is it possible to get the class of system in the system info (the little bit that says what system your in at the top left corner). That way you know what type of hole your in without having to right click and all that stupid ****.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#92 - 2014-08-07 01:19:44 UTC
Black Hole
*golf clap* you jjust made the hole worst at PVE the most sought after for Tengus.

My concern with the new Black Hole is....well, everything. Orthruses Online. I guess you're supposed to fly nano torp Ravens?

It replaces all the penalties to turrets with basically a buff to missiles and nothing else. And the targeting range bonus is a bit weird, and a complete 100% reveral on the previous. Which doesn't negate dampstar POSs or damps, but sits weirdly with me. i know you're trying for 80km kiting torp Ravens, it's a good dream to dream, but having grid-length targeting isn't going to help anything.

Wolf-Rayet
I'll let others say stupid stuff about this before i respond.

Phoenix Jones wrote:

I'm sure the Wolf Rayet people will feel a bit sad, but I get the concern.


There we go.

Dude you've been doing WR all wrong. In fact, given your responses on other threads, you clearly have no idea about anything. Let me lay this out for you.

Current WR: AFs and Logi.
New WR: EVEN MORE AFs AND EVEN MORE LOGI. (also, lol Mallers)

Magnetar
Overall a good set of choices. Tickybox.

Red Giant
Still fairly meh, just like before.

Pulsar
I am 100% certain that this is just a shield nag nerf by way of Nos and neut buff, but I also welcome this for use in lower-class wormholes to crack Basi fleets and active tanked Tengus. Not that a Void bomb couldn't do it perfectly already, but I see no problem with this.

Caps will still be stronk tank, and i'm yet to see a shield Bhaalgorn.

Cataclysmic
I know I'm not exactly orthodox in the stuff I fly, but I don't think that you needed to worry at all about nerfing Guardian blobs into the ground in Cat var holes if you were too overboard on the nerf to remote cap transfers. People with logi 5 will just have to put two cap transfers on each other instead of running one in and out.

The way to deal with fights in Cats is and will always be neuting the logi anyway. This just, really, further reinforces the need to neut them (they have more cap base, and swap less, ergo cap dead stays cap dead now). The way to respond is clearly to add more Guardians. Bonus.

For low-class holes the most efficient ship is the Execquror anyway, but the buff to local capacitor will also help people solo in their blingy Tengu's after the rebalance. We are all in favour of blingy Tengus in low-class Cat var.
- - -

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Adarnof
Kingsparrow Wormhole Division
Birds of Prey.
#93 - 2014-08-07 01:37:20 UTC
After consulting my logistics guys, I have serious reservations about the Cataclysmic Variable changes.

Firstly, T2 logistics WILL in fact suffer. As previously shown, the local regen bonus will not compensate for the loss of remote transfers. However I have larger issues with the implications on our escalation fleets.

Already dealing with a local tank nerf means carriers will not survive triage and are forced to spidertank. This is not by choice as you seem to presume, this is a necessity. Because of this they are forced to use remote cap transfers to maintain stability in order to compensate for the increased amount of tank modules to make a comparable tank to triage. While you are right in your assessment that spider-tanking carriers are pretty over-powered in PvP, most effects have a fleet comp that is uniquely suited to take advantage of the local effects. Remote rep is simply the Cataclysmic version, and unfortunately this extends to capitals.

I know we'll be spending the next three weeks reworking our fleet. And I'm not optimistic about being able to stay in a cataclysmic. They're already below par on your activity graph, I fear what little use they see in upper-class holes will promptly vanish.

Personally I'd rather see more capitals committed to fights than less, even if it means pantheon fleets. They've been broken before (hell, even we've lost pantheon carriers to smart FCs) so it's not like they're immune.


tl;dr C5/6 cataclysmics are now dead. I am not OK with this, I enjoy them.
Bombshell
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#94 - 2014-08-07 02:28:13 UTC
Overall these changes appear to have merit, at face value.

Looking at the CV changes closer I just can't get the fact that logi 5 pilots are now required to play like logi 4 pilots again. We made the time dedication for logi 5 so we could have more fleet utility and counter enemy fleet cap warfare. Now in our home system we have a greater susceptibility to Legion fleets.

The effect penalties could possibly be reduced so Guardians and Basilisks could keep their single cap xfer for cap stability. To help counter the extra susceptibility to cap warfare possibly give a penalty to modules that drain cap, kind of the opposite of what was done for these modules in Pulsars (making them stronger).

With this you still effectively reduce the pantheon carriers current abilities while maintaining the balance that CCP is striving for without completely breaking CV wormhole space and driving the current denizens into other effects.
Hayley Enaka
Bookmark Both Sides
#95 - 2014-08-07 02:31:43 UTC
Just my general thoughts below;


  • I also look forward to seeing some occupied Black Holes in future with plenty of Drakes to fill the killboards.
  • I was pretty happy with Magnetars already but interesting to see the Target Painting penalty which is a slight PVE nerf
  • For Red Giants I'll repeat what Jack mentioned and say that they also need a buff to bomb HP or else you're getting half the bombs for double the damage which essentially negates the change unless the intention is to simply allow bombs to be effective without requiring a full squad of them. Also, does the damage buff also affect the amount neuted by void bombs or are these unchanged?
  • Even the relatively short time I spent living in a c5 pulsar was enough to teach me that carriers were extremely hard to break so the neut buff is welcome.
  • Wolf-Rayets should be fun combined with the new sub-cruiser sized holes. Nice to see the bonus brought in line with Pulsars as well.
  • The cap transfer penalty is a nicely creative way to nerf carrier blobs in Cataclysmic holes. For people concerned about their subcap logi wing, don't forget that Oneiros and Scimitars are a thing. The point of wormhole bonuses is to force you to adapt your doctrines to suit the environment you're in. Deal with it.


Overall, it looks pretty good and definitely far from the death of wormhole space we all predicted
Bombshell
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#96 - 2014-08-07 02:33:34 UTC
Maybe this is also a little off topic here, but is there a way to actually get the wormhole effects displayed in game? I recall a recent change to the api data (kill data) due to that information not being available in game in any way. So, keeping everything equal can we get this information put into the game menus/windows somewhere?
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#97 - 2014-08-07 02:39:10 UTC
Awesome, I'm glad that I have no missile skills and live in a black hole. *slow clap*
Andiedeath
We Aim To MisBehave
Wild Geese.
#98 - 2014-08-07 02:58:54 UTC
Im a fan! Overall the Calaclysmic changes look solid and will change up residents thinking! The only other is the resistance buff drop for armor in Wolf Rayet. As long as we can still use Assault frigates comfortably in c4 sites will be happy for that odd moment we need to refill the PVP isk budget.

Director

Sefem Velox

INGAME CHANNEL: Sefem Public
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation
Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
#99 - 2014-08-07 03:14:48 UTC
These look like fun.

Wolf Rayets are going to be amazing fun. How many of you C6 dudes out there will be running multi plate small gun T3/BS's now :P

As a pilot who lives in a Cat Variable, these look good. The big change for people will be shifting from Chain Logi to Solo Logi's. So Onieros over Guardians, Triage over Cap Chain.
The thing that'd really cement the Cat Variable in would be a capital module of the Capacitor Battery. Let us really go all out on that total cap pool :P
Galtianis
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#100 - 2014-08-07 03:38:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Galtianis
Regarding cataclysmic variable:
After doing some math and fiddling with EFT fits, I've determined that spider-tanking of any kind is effectively dead. You can still use T2 Logistics & pilots with Logistics V and 2 cap transfers to compensate for the cap transfer penalty, or maybe you can still manage to stay cap stable with a single remote armor repair module on each battleship. However, this essentially means that you are no better off than if you were in k-space or another wormhole, you are just forced to use RR mechanics and lose the only benefit they had.
Looking at the activity chart, I can see why the cataclysmic variable needs to be modified so that those systems are used more. However, removing the only advantage this effect has over others and not providing any additional incentive will effectively make them the least suitable for any kind of activity as I see it.
The biggest problem I see with capitals in cataclysmic variable wormholes is that siege dreadnoughts are at a disadvantage when trying to clear combat sites because they need to sacrifice DPS to fit a beefier (and much more expensive) tank due to the local repair penalty. When the damage of dreadnoughts is reduced to make room for a tank to survive aggro shifts, it becomes apparent that you would make more ISK in another type of wormhole.

I have a simple solution (in place of proposed changes) that would balance both carriers and dreadnoughts. The downside (or bonus depending on how you see things) would be that Magnetar PvE would take a hit (because of dreadnoughts losing the 100% damage bonus).

Role Bonus (Carrier):

  • 200% bonus to Fighter control range
  • Can fit Warfare Link modules
  • Can fit Triage modules
  • Immune to all wormhole environmental effects


Role Bonus (Dreadnought):

  • Can fit Siege modules
  • Immune to all wormhole environmental effects


I don't think this would be much of a stretch considering that supercapitals are already immune to all forms of Electronic Warfare.