These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: New Tech2 modules

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Foxlike
Doomheim
#221 - 2011-12-08 19:55:42 UTC
Nice changes!
But
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • and Skirmish Warfare Link – Sensor Integrity II: boost increased from 3.5 to 3.75% to keep the tech2 boost consistent among all warfare modules.

    • There's no such module What? Did you mean rapid deployment link?
    Realyst
    Thunderwaffe
    Goonswarm Federation
    #222 - 2011-12-08 19:58:36 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

    Bomb Launcher II: capacity increased from 150 to 225m3, allows it to carry 3 bombs instead of 2.

    Still no reason to train Bomb deployment 5. Try to do something more useful like launching 2 bombs at the same time.
    Emmerik
    NED-Clan
    Goonswarm Federation
    #223 - 2011-12-08 20:09:21 UTC
    What about Shield Capital shield recharge after bonus? any news on that?
    My Wyvern has about 50% shield left after the most basic fleet bonus

    (btw I love the Triage and Bomb launcher buff )
    Sarius Deteis
    Not a tax haven
    #224 - 2011-12-08 23:37:42 UTC
    Realyst wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

    Bomb Launcher II: capacity increased from 150 to 225m3, allows it to carry 3 bombs instead of 2.

    Still no reason to train Bomb deployment 5. Try to do something more useful like launching 2 bombs at the same time.


    OCD?
    Sigras
    Conglomo
    #225 - 2011-12-08 23:53:34 UTC
    FlameGlow wrote:
    No boost to local repair amount in triage will save you, say it is boosted well maybe you'll be able to tank 2 SCs or 3 dreadnoughts, so what? These days many corporations, not even alliances, can field that.
    Capacitor consumption on remote reps is a great bonus on the other hand - you might be able to run 3 reps for the whole triage cycle with that without devoting all slots to cap recharge mods.


    Its a matter of commitment; you can never get an archon to tank a whole fleet nor should you, but you've just lowered the commitment that other groups need to make to destroy your single carrier.

    With a 3-4 to 1 ratio even though most groups had the ships to bring it down easily, it was a serious commitment; with that being reduced to a 2 to 1 ratio its not nearly as much of a commitment.
    Adeena Torcfist
    Right Hand Of The Legion.
    Get Off My Lawn
    #226 - 2011-12-09 03:06:15 UTC
    i must admit, i wont be training for Triage II unless i get a Local Shield Boost bonus. the time,, invested, just wont be worth it. Im not going to be much use Repping if i cant even keep myself alive.

    that really is a must.

    again, i still see no point in the bomb launcher, i can only carry 2 bombs in my hold anyway, so if i were to reload, id still be missing a bomb.

    a damage bonus might be nice i guess... or lower fitting reqs.....
    Alekseyev Karrde
    Noir.
    Shadow Cartel
    #227 - 2011-12-09 05:41:30 UTC
    I like the direction of these.

    RE: Triage Module II - I think a split between the proposed cap reduction for remote repair and an increase in local tank is the best way to go. The numbers will need some adjustment but instead of 20% cap reduction for remote I'd be happy with something like 10% cap reduction and 10% local rep amount. There's also the argument of reduced cap use would free up slots for tank but not every carrier will be well positioned to take advantage of that with their slot layouts.

    Unless 20% remote transfer cap reduction AND 10-20% local rep amount is on the table. Given the dread buff, that's not too unreasonable.

    Alek the Kidnapper, Hero of the CSM
    Arkady Sadik
    Gradient
    Electus Matari
    #228 - 2011-12-09 08:11:11 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

    Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:

    • Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

    I didn't check the exact numbers, but this seems a bit excessive. The Archon is the only carrier who can fit 3 same-classed RR modules (the Nid can fit 2x armor, 1x shield, but not 3x armor). The Archon also has the best cap already. This will likely make the Archon able to run 3 RR cap stable or at least mostly cap stable, increasing the divide between the Archon and "the other carriers" for pvp even further.

    Please consider reducing the Archon's pg so it can't fit 3 armor RR modules and an energy transfer.

    (This will still give the Archon a MUCH stronger tank than any other carrier, including the Chimera; carriers are not balanced.)
    Alex Harumichi
    SoE Roughriders
    Electus Matari
    #229 - 2011-12-09 08:23:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Harumichi
    Arkady Sadik wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

    Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:

    • Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

    I didn't check the exact numbers, but this seems a bit excessive. The Archon is the only carrier who can fit 3 same-classed RR modules (the Nid can fit 2x armor, 1x shield, but not 3x armor). The Archon also has the best cap already. This will likely make the Archon able to run 3 RR cap stable or at least mostly cap stable, increasing the divide between the Archon and "the other carriers" for pvp even further.

    Please consider reducing the Archon's pg so it can't fit 3 armor RR modules and an energy transfer.

    (This will still give the Archon a MUCH stronger tank than any other carrier, including the Chimera; carriers are not balanced.)


    Signed. Saying this as an Archon pilot: please either nerf it a bit or boost the other carriers. At the moment, the Archon is so much better than the others it's not even very funny. Vastly more cap, tank and (with this) triage ability.

    Naturally enough, I'd prefer to see the others boosted than seeing the Archon nerfed, but I can live with a nerf too. I'd like to see balance here. As someone with Amarr Carrier V trained a nerf would hit me hard. I'd still prefer it to the current situation. We have people who have trained a Chimera, for example, and it's close to being not worth flying with the current numbers.

    To the devs: just fit out all four carriers in EFT (with triage setups), compare raw numbers. It's not rocket science. Well, it is, sortof, but not that way ;)

    That said: making the t2 triage module worth training for is an excellent move. The 20% cap reduction may be excessive though... how about 10% less cap use, 10% more repper range? Or something like that.
    Svennig
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #230 - 2011-12-09 08:49:52 UTC
    Arkady Sadik wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

    Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:

    • Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

    I didn't check the exact numbers, but this seems a bit excessive. The Archon is the only carrier who can fit 3 same-classed RR modules (the Nid can fit 2x armor, 1x shield, but not 3x armor). The Archon also has the best cap already. This will likely make the Archon able to run 3 RR cap stable or at least mostly cap stable, increasing the divide between the Archon and "the other carriers" for pvp even further.

    Please consider reducing the Archon's pg so it can't fit 3 armor RR modules and an energy transfer.

    (This will still give the Archon a MUCH stronger tank than any other carrier, including the Chimera; carriers are not balanced.)


    This is an argument to boost the other carriers, not to nerf the archon. The archon is the only carrier that, currently, comes close to fulfilling its role.
    Svennig
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #231 - 2011-12-09 09:05:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Svennig
    Two step wrote:
    I would much rather see T2 triage give a local tanking boost. Especially with the Moros boost, triage carriers are a lot more vulnerable to dreads now, and the long train for T2 triage should reduce that.


    I think I've said this before, but doesn't a cap reduction bonus bonus basically allow for a tanking bonus? I'm not sure what you have in mind, but if you're using 20% less cap, then you can drop a CPR2 for a third EANM, and that brings reps from 13512 to 15760 in triage, a ~17% boost.

    Now whether you chose to go for that depends if you're usually running out of cap before dying, or dying before running out of cap.
    Gypsio III
    Questionable Ethics.
    Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
    #232 - 2011-12-09 09:48:09 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

    Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:

    • Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

    • Sister core probe launcher and expanded probe launcher: now provide a 10% boost to scan probe strength instead of 5%. That's to keep an appeal for the faction mods despite the arrival of a tech2 version.

    • Skirmish Warfare Link – Interdiction Maneuvers II and Skirmish Warfare Link – Sensor Integrity II: boost increased from 3.5 to 3.75% to keep the tech2 boost consistent among all warfare modules.

    • Information Warfare Link – Electronic Superiority II: boost for Remote Sensor Dampeners and Tracking Disruptors increased from 1.25 to 1.5%. Previous numbers were erroneous.

    • Mining Foreman Link – Mining Laser Field Enhancement II: boost increased from 5 to 5.625%: same reason as above, to keep tech2 boost consistent among all gang links.

    • Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link: tracking and speed multipliers for drones increased from 1.25x to 1.3x, again to keep an interest on the faction variant next to the new tech2 module.

    • Bomb Launcher II: capacity increased from 150 to 225m3, allows it to carry 3 bombs instead of 2.


    Feedback is welcome.


    Seriously.This reeks of ill-thought-out power creep. I'm not going to comment on the triage/Siege module changes specifically, but if you want to increase the strength of, say, probes or the Minmatar skirmish links, then you need to demonstrate to the community that the current incarnations are underpowered. You are currently justifying a boost to the Skirmish links not by careful consideration of in-game balance and the powers of the different classes of warfare link, but by "pretty patterns of numbers". Surely you can see that this is not sensible.

    The Skirmish links are already probably the most powerful and popular. Long-range tackle is really powerful. The Information warfare links are basically ignored and hopeless, in comparison - likewise for their host Command Ship platforms. And your reaction is to boost the Skirmish links? Is it because they iz Minmatar? P

    I can only urge you to properly balance the links that we already have - and their host ships - before worrying about the magnitudes of their bonuses.
    Jack Dant
    The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
    #233 - 2011-12-09 09:55:43 UTC
    Svennig wrote:
    Two step wrote:
    I would much rather see T2 triage give a local tanking boost. Especially with the Moros boost, triage carriers are a lot more vulnerable to dreads now, and the long train for T2 triage should reduce that.


    I think I've said this before, but doesn't a cap reduction bonus bonus basically allow for a tanking bonus? I'm not sure what you have in mind, but if you're using 20% less cap, then you can drop a CPR2 for a third EANM, and that brings reps from 13512 to 15760 in triage, a ~17% boost.

    Now whether you chose to go for that depends if you're usually running out of cap before dying, or dying before running out of cap.

    Note the proposed triage cap reduction bonus only affects RR, not the local reps. With only 2 CPR, an archon can't run its local tank cap stable. It's close, but not enough.

    What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
    CynoNet Two
    GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
    Goonswarm Federation
    #234 - 2011-12-09 09:58:04 UTC
    Aamrr wrote:
    Triage desperately needs a tanking boost to protect them from the newly buffed dreadnoughts. The added protection against supercapitals is also very welcome...


    They got one, albeit indirectly. The reduced cap use bonus means they can get away with fitting less cap mods and more tank mods and provide the same reps as before. I think this also means that most suicide (4-rep cap stable) fits will now be able to fit a damage control and run all their reps, potentially doubling their EHP in some cases.
    Alex Harumichi
    SoE Roughriders
    Electus Matari
    #235 - 2011-12-09 09:59:15 UTC
    Gypsio III wrote:

    Seriously.This reeks of ill-thought-out power creep.

    ...

    The Skirmish links are already probably the most powerful and popular. Long-range tackle is really powerful. The Information warfare links are basically ignored and hopeless, in comparison - likewise for their host Command Ship platforms.


    I have to agree here, especially about the links. Skirmish links are already extremely powerful. Information Warfare links, however, are almost a joke. It's very, very rare to see anyone use them -- usually because the other alternatives (armor/shield tanking and skirmish) are much more powerful and universally useful. If anything, the Infowar links need a uniform boost across the board. This also applies to the poor Eos, the red-headed stepchild of fleet command ships :}
    Svennig
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #236 - 2011-12-09 10:20:07 UTC
    Jack Dant wrote:
    Svennig wrote:
    Two step wrote:
    I would much rather see T2 triage give a local tanking boost. Especially with the Moros boost, triage carriers are a lot more vulnerable to dreads now, and the long train for T2 triage should reduce that.


    I think I've said this before, but doesn't a cap reduction bonus bonus basically allow for a tanking bonus? I'm not sure what you have in mind, but if you're using 20% less cap, then you can drop a CPR2 for a third EANM, and that brings reps from 13512 to 15760 in triage, a ~17% boost.

    Now whether you chose to go for that depends if you're usually running out of cap before dying, or dying before running out of cap.

    Note the proposed triage cap reduction bonus only affects RR, not the local reps. With only 2 CPR, an archon can't run its local tank cap stable. It's close, but not enough.


    It doesn't have to be cap stable. It has to have enough cap for the triage cycle.
    Jack Dant
    The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
    #237 - 2011-12-09 10:26:08 UTC
    Svennig wrote:
    Jack Dant wrote:

    Note the proposed triage cap reduction bonus only affects RR, not the local reps. With only 2 CPR, an archon can't run its local tank cap stable. It's close, but not enough.


    It doesn't have to be cap stable. It has to have enough cap for the triage cycle.

    From the cap you have at jump in, minus whatever neuts you get on you. It's going to be pretty close.

    What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644
    Nikuno
    Atomic Heroes
    #238 - 2011-12-09 10:38:21 UTC
    Gypsio III wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

    Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:

    • Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

    • Sister core probe launcher and expanded probe launcher: now provide a 10% boost to scan probe strength instead of 5%. That's to keep an appeal for the faction mods despite the arrival of a tech2 version.

    • Skirmish Warfare Link – Interdiction Maneuvers II and Skirmish Warfare Link – Sensor Integrity II: boost increased from 3.5 to 3.75% to keep the tech2 boost consistent among all warfare modules.

    • Information Warfare Link – Electronic Superiority II: boost for Remote Sensor Dampeners and Tracking Disruptors increased from 1.25 to 1.5%. Previous numbers were erroneous.

    • Mining Foreman Link – Mining Laser Field Enhancement II: boost increased from 5 to 5.625%: same reason as above, to keep tech2 boost consistent among all gang links.

    • Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link: tracking and speed multipliers for drones increased from 1.25x to 1.3x, again to keep an interest on the faction variant next to the new tech2 module.

    • Bomb Launcher II: capacity increased from 150 to 225m3, allows it to carry 3 bombs instead of 2.


    Feedback is welcome.


    Seriously.This reeks of ill-thought-out power creep. I'm not going to comment on the triage/Siege module changes specifically, but if you want to increase the strength of, say, probes or the Minmatar skirmish links, then you need to demonstrate to the community that the current incarnations are underpowered. You are currently justifying a boost to the Skirmish links not by careful consideration of in-game balance and the powers of the different classes of warfare link, but by "pretty patterns of numbers". Surely you can see that this is not sensible.

    The Skirmish links are already probably the most powerful and popular. Long-range tackle is really powerful. The Information warfare links are basically ignored and hopeless, in comparison - likewise for their host Command Ship platforms. And your reaction is to boost the Skirmish links? Is it because they iz Minmatar? P

    I can only urge you to properly balance the links that we already have - and their host ships - before worrying about the magnitudes of their bonuses.


    I agree entirely. Skirmish links are already too powerful. We flew a lachesis fitted with a republic warp disruptor with a claymore booster and were able to get 101km point if we overheated. That's just plain ridiculous. We can now point people at current long range combat distances. Though I suppose it might push fleets further out, you then run into theproblem of the enemy probing-and-warping to you if you're 150km or more away. Whilst I 100% support keeping the faction modules viable (Eve benefits massively from having great variety in it's mods), the extra strength boost means we get found even faster with the improved sister probes.

    I think the 'sensor integrity' reference is to the information warfare link, not a skirmish link. Finally, the electronic superiority link was always an error, which i did point out in several threads, and I'm glad to see this addressed. HOWEVER - information warfare links are still the bastard child of fleet links. They are so underwhelming in their current form as to be worthless in terms of function, power, relevance to the game as played and market value. Seriously CCP, please give these a major overhaul as they are currently just clogging up the database.
    Neo Agricola
    Gallente Federation
    #239 - 2011-12-09 10:54:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Neo Agricola
    Svennig wrote:

    This is an argument to boost the other carriers, not to nerf the archon. The archon is the only carrier that, currently, comes close to fulfilling its role.

    /THIS!
    Very much THIS!

    DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=706442#post706442 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710
    mkjkgkvk Melkan
    Doomheim
    #240 - 2011-12-09 11:10:37 UTC
    Svennig wrote:
    Arkady Sadik wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Hey in there, you are not forgotten, just a bit busy with multiple stuff coming in.

    Here are the iteration changes planned for tech2 mods:

    • Triage module II: now provides a 20% capacitor reduction to remote capital armor repairers, remote capital hull repairers, capital shield transfers and capital energy transfers while in triage mode. Doesn't provide any bonus to local repairer/boosters however. Previously the module had little interest to train for, should now be worth the time.

    I didn't check the exact numbers, but this seems a bit excessive. The Archon is the only carrier who can fit 3 same-classed RR modules (the Nid can fit 2x armor, 1x shield, but not 3x armor). The Archon also has the best cap already. This will likely make the Archon able to run 3 RR cap stable or at least mostly cap stable, increasing the divide between the Archon and "the other carriers" for pvp even further.

    Please consider reducing the Archon's pg so it can't fit 3 armor RR modules and an energy transfer.

    (This will still give the Archon a MUCH stronger tank than any other carrier, including the Chimera; carriers are not balanced.)


    This is an argument to boost the other carriers, not to nerf the archon. The archon is the only carrier that, currently, comes close to fulfilling its role.

    +1