These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Tech 3 *utility* - not so much power.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenshae Chiroptera
#1 - 2015-04-20 05:51:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Going to work with the idea of T3 Frigates first because they would be cheaper, faster to train and get less whining than Cruisers, BCs or BSes.

First of all you would pick a slot configuration (all have 3 rigs):
- 2 low, 6 med, 3 high
- 3 low, 5 med, 4 high
- 4 low, 4 med, 5 high
- 5 low, 3 med, 4 high
- 6 low, 2 med, 3 high

Then you chose a hull bonus by popping in a sub-system:
- 15% bonus to Shield / Armour Transporter boost amount, capacitor use 700% bonus to range (vs 10% and 500% for T1)
- 15% dmg, 10% tracking, 15% optimal, -65% MWD sig penalty (vs 5% dmg, 7.5 tracking, 10% optimal, 5% dmg, -50% MWD sig penalty for T2)

.... you get the general idea.

Now, here is one of the keys to this - the base stats remain almost the same as T2 frigates (hull, armour, shields, resists, speeds, etc)

Arrow This means that it comes down to how you link your slot configuration + subsystem bonus + modules fit.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Aza Ebanu wrote:
... The game design is bad because, it emphasizes numbers over individual skill. ...
Sorry, but EVE is not the Hero's Journey.

Yes, the right ship can fight a weak gang, yes a really well formed team like Rooks and Kings can stand toe to toe with huge alliances.
I think that is fantastic and I am sorry to see more power creep, more being stacked on the n+1 game style, where utility, tactics and strategy are being stripped of potential and opportunity.

However, right from a mining operation, to industrials moving things, to scouts and so forth, n+1 means more ISK, more power and more resources.
This is a great MMO because the easiest way to forge ahead is by gathering number, building a group, emphasis on Multiplayer.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2015-04-20 14:35:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Tabyll Altol
No. I think the capitals are first and this will take quite some time until they are finished with them --> long way to go and why would we need t 3 frigs ? The only space in there is a t2 logi frig.

And don´t you think that are a bit many slots for a frig ?

-1
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
#3 - 2015-04-20 15:18:51 UTC
Tabyll Altol wrote:
No. I think the capitals are first and this will take quite some time until they are finished with them --> long way to go and why would we need t 3 frigs ? The only space in there is a t2 logi frig.

And don´t you think that are a bit many slots for a frig ?

-1


QUITE a bit many slots for frigates.

-1 to this idea,

but I agree with title. T3s should be unique, specialized ships. Not OP ships.

The UI update we deserve
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#4 - 2015-04-20 17:02:45 UTC
Leto Aramaus wrote:
Tabyll Altol wrote:
No. I think the capitals are first and this will take quite some time until they are finished with them --> long way to go and why would we need t 3 frigs ? The only space in there is a t2 logi frig.

And don´t you think that are a bit many slots for a frig ?

-1


QUITE a bit many slots for frigates.

-1 to this idea,

but I agree with title. T3s should be unique, specialized ships. Not OP ships.


no - T3's should be unique, GENERALISED ships, able to do anything, but less well than their T2 counterpart

+1 for the general idea, though too many slots for a frig, I think, but I like the general idea.

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#5 - 2015-04-21 03:34:03 UTC
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
+1 I like the general idea.
+1 That is the point of the thread.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Cade Windstalker
#6 - 2015-04-21 07:33:16 UTC
This sounds like a way to cook up a super OP made to order Frigate hull (or any hull, if we extend the bonuses to other ship types) that's either going to end up flat better than a specialized T2 hull or flat worse, in every case, depending on the slot layout and magnitude of the bonuses. If the bonuses are they same or better then T2 hulls it'll be flat better, if they're the same you can probably find a better slot layout with the T3 hulls, and if they're worse then in any case where the bonus matters less than the slot layout they'll be better and in any other case worse.

Even something that let you mix and match generic bonuses like the current T3 Subsystems is more interesting and more able to be balanced against T2 than this.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#7 - 2015-04-21 13:48:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Cade Windstalker wrote:
if we extend
If the bonuses
if they're the same
if they're worse
.
That is a lot of ifs.
Frigates need to be more simplified, they aren't ships built to really last, they die a lot, so the process to set it up, should be as simple as possible. I agree with some of the theory crafting in T3 Cruisers, I am trying to point out more utility rather than raw damage and tank.
For example, a ship with a MWD bonus and two mid slots can only use one tackle module. It has very narrow utility and the players can not alter that.

The only reason to give a little extra on bonuses is to
1) justify the cost to use them in players minds
and
2) to get players using them in the first place as they generally won't naturally see the extra power that they can apply with skilled ship building in the utility.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#8 - 2015-04-21 16:51:00 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
This sounds like a way to cook up a super OP made to order Frigate hull (or any hull, if we extend the bonuses to other ship types) that's either going to end up flat better than a specialized T2 hull or flat worse, in every case, depending on the slot layout and magnitude of the bonuses. If the bonuses are they same or better then T2 hulls it'll be flat better, if they're the same you can probably find a better slot layout with the T3 hulls, and if they're worse then in any case where the bonus matters less than the slot layout they'll be better and in any other case worse.

Even something that let you mix and match generic bonuses like the current T3 Subsystems is more interesting and more able to be balanced against T2 than this.


The OP stated that it would NEVER get better bonuses than a T2 variant (just better than a T1)
as for slot layout, you probably have enough choice in current ships.... for that not to be a huge issue

they're supposed to be worse at any given situation (than T2), but with the primary advantage of changing roles very quickly (as with all T3's)

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#9 - 2015-04-21 17:20:41 UTC
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
they're supposed to be worse at any given situation (than T2), but with the primary advantage of changing roles very quickly (as with all T3's)
I would prefer more fixed.
I don't like the T3 destroyers.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Arla Sarain
#10 - 2015-04-21 17:28:22 UTC
You are still stuck with your tactical options in a fight with what you picked in your hangar, which kinda defeats the purpose of generalizing. If you can reassemble your frig to do some specialised job, you might as well pick a specialised frig to begin with.

I think T3Ds have merit in their design in that they can change their role (or that was the intention) on the go, without docking up, refitting, undocking, and just being a motivation to not train ship skills for specialised ships.

In that philosophy, I don't think subsystem T3s anythings should be revisited.

I'd rather see a T3 frigate hull with many slots in both high, low and mids, but not enough CPU/PG to fit it all, and a role bonus that reduces module online cap requirement. That way you can have a large assortment of modules and are highly flexible, but have to be quick and accurate with what modules you online and offline in space, during a fight or whatever.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#11 - 2015-04-21 17:53:13 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
You are still stuck with your tactical options in a fight with what you picked in your hangar, which kinda defeats the purpose of generalizing. If you can reassemble your frig to do some specialised job, you might as well pick a specialised frig to begin with.

I think T3Ds have merit in their design in that they can change their role (or that was the intention) on the go, without docking up, refitting, undocking, and just being a motivation to not train ship skills for specialised ships.

In that philosophy, I don't think subsystem T3s anythings should be revisited.

I'd rather see a T3 frigate hull with many slots in both high, low and mids, but not enough CPU/PG to fit it all, and a role bonus that reduces module online cap requirement. That way you can have a large assortment of modules and are highly flexible, but have to be quick and accurate with what modules you online and offline in space, during a fight or whatever.


a VERRRRY inerrrressssting idea! I like it! although people will jam the lows with MAPC's and CPU upgrades, and gimp the lows to online more modules.....

that said, T3c's can use depot's/ship maint arrays as well as docking up/POS services

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#12 - 2015-04-21 19:50:20 UTC
can we get the other T3s that are already in game balanced b4 adding more?

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Jenshae Chiroptera
#13 - 2015-04-21 21:25:00 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
I'd rather see a T3 frigate hull with many slots in both high, low and mids, but not enough CPU/PG to fit it all, and a role bonus that reduces module online cap requirement. That way you can have a large assortment of modules and are highly flexible, but have to be quick and accurate with what modules you online and offline in space, during a fight or whatever.
Interesting.
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
can we get the other T3s that are already in game balanced b4 adding more?
This is part of that if you read closely.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#14 - 2015-05-21 22:23:42 UTC
I think this topic is important while T3 Ds are being developed.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#15 - 2015-05-23 06:31:44 UTC  |  Edited by: James Baboli
so maybe if you can pick the slot layout while docked but have the same number of slots as a normal t1 frigate. that might work out somewhat. Cap the selection at the most slots any frigate has in that rack. Couple this with a racially flavored bonuses, with stock t2 resists, and now you have a ship which can be very flexible, but which needs needs to dock up to shift what thing(s) it is doing really well if maximally focused, or to dock up to focus in on one thing as hard as possible.

so maxes are

4/5/4 and 3 hardpoints for missiles and turrets with a max of 10 slots across all 3 racks.

so, a fully min/maxed Ewar layout might be 1/5/4, with an armor tank and a prop and then 4 mids for the ewar, while an armor brawler might go 3/3/4, and a shield kiter might want 3/4/3. etc.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Jenshae Chiroptera
#16 - 2015-05-23 13:28:44 UTC
Yes.
Agree on being docked up.
Not limited to just frigates, they are an example of the concept utility instead of power.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Specia1 K
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#17 - 2015-05-23 15:12:19 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
so maybe if you can pick the slot layout while docked but have the same number of slots as a normal t1 frigate. that might work out somewhat. Cap the selection at the most slots any frigate has in that rack. Couple this with a racially flavored bonuses, with stock t2 resists, and now you have a ship which can be very flexible, but which needs needs to dock up to shift what thing(s) it is doing really well if maximally focused, or to dock up to focus in on one thing as hard as possible.

so maxes are

4/5/4 and 3 hardpoints for missiles and turrets with a max of 10 slots across all 3 racks.

so, a fully min/maxed Ewar layout might be 1/5/4, with an armor tank and a prop and then 4 mids for the ewar, while an armor brawler might go 3/3/4, and a shield kiter might want 3/4/3. etc.


or 1/1/8 for the ultimate hull-tanked bait ship?Twisted

The OP, while interesting, is really looking something like an OMNI-FRIGATE. Perhaps this might be something distinct from any/all of the current empire and faction ships? Could even offer it's own frigate-class bonuses too.

Champion of the Knights of the General Discussion

Thunderdome
Jenshae Chiroptera
#18 - 2015-05-23 15:19:19 UTC
Bonuses can be race limited.
Webs for Minmatar.
ECM for Caldari, etc

T2 ship configured the way you want with slots + one or two more slots total rather than huge tanks and damage, etc.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#19 - 2015-05-24 00:27:56 UTC
Specia1 K wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
so maybe if you can pick the slot layout while docked but have the same number of slots as a normal t1 frigate. that might work out somewhat. Cap the selection at the most slots any frigate has in that rack. Couple this with a racially flavored bonuses, with stock t2 resists, and now you have a ship which can be very flexible, but which needs needs to dock up to shift what thing(s) it is doing really well if maximally focused, or to dock up to focus in on one thing as hard as possible.

so maxes are

4/5/4 and 3 hardpoints for missiles and turrets with a max of 10 slots across all 3 racks.

so, a fully min/maxed Ewar layout might be 1/5/4, with an armor tank and a prop and then 4 mids for the ewar, while an armor brawler might go 3/3/4, and a shield kiter might want 3/4/3. etc.


or 1/1/8 for the ultimate hull-tanked bait ship?Twisted

The OP, while interesting, is really looking something like an OMNI-FRIGATE. Perhaps this might be something distinct from any/all of the current empire and faction ships? Could even offer it's own frigate-class bonuses too.

Nope. Max of the most slots any existing t1 frigate in any rack, do you not read.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Sespria Secantus
Doomheim
#20 - 2015-05-24 04:51:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Sespria Secantus
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
can we get the other T3s that are already in game balanced b4 adding more?


Precisely this. Too many new ships too soon = a recipe for disaster. CCP should just focus on balancing the current ships for the moment, especially the BC's.
12Next page