These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[June] [Updated] Module Tiericide - Afterburners & Microwarpdrives

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#281 - 2015-05-07 14:38:51 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Ms Michigan wrote:
1) Do not increase the top MWD speeds, if anything nerf the lower ends. I personally would like to see the whole scale dropped to make Afterburners more feasible.

or

1a) Buff Afterburners!!!!!! - However I second what many are saying about speed VS. Server ticks. I think grid speed should be dropped overall. IF you look at the impact of boosters, drugs, Wormhole effects, High-end modules/ships....we have enough speed. Kiting is the meta already just a tad too much. (ISHTARs online....HALF of that equation is speed versus....the other half was the sentries.) Just a thought!!!

Howabout add something to close the gap a bit? Doesn't need to be a new module type, instead I propose prop mod scripts:
Afterburner script: increases speed a lot but greatly increases capacitor consumption to an amount higher than MWD consumes
MWD script: reduces speed a lot, but reduces sig penalty a lot more


The 3/5MN and 30/50MN mid-tier Afterburners - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=419044&find=unread

P workable soluation.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Arla Sarain
#282 - 2015-05-07 15:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Arla Sarain
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#283 - 2015-05-07 16:24:23 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


Except, y'know, that removes the fitting decision.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#284 - 2015-05-07 16:25:08 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


ABs got a bunch of scenarios in which they are used, and they are by far not limited to FW. They're used for solo, for spidertanks, for Fleets. Bhaalgorns fit ABs to ensure speed tracking against dreads supported by not reliably jammed lokis. They are amazing for mirror matchups and are frequently used near gates/holes/stations or other points where an orthrus isn't autowin against pmuch anything.

There is no lack of need for ABs, but mwds scale a lot better for small gangs, especially in FW. 5 tanky tristans are bad compared to 5 very fast and ganky tristans, that though is not a sign that something with ABs is wrong.
Arla Sarain
#285 - 2015-05-07 16:28:04 UTC
Masao Kurata wrote:
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


Except, y'know, that removes the fitting decision.

Fit X to win
Fit Y to lose

Fitting decisions Hurrah.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#286 - 2015-05-07 16:38:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Masao Kurata wrote:
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


Except, y'know, that removes the fitting decision.


So two new types of charges to carry in the cargo hold.

/not sure

Then again, it could keep nanugaffers in check, and limit the length, and the number of such engagements that one can undertake if consumption is anything like the Entosis Link, yo.

Brawling paradise! ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#287 - 2015-05-07 16:44:57 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.

Howabout combine my script idea and your fuel idea, leave in fitting decisions but keep them broad so that one choice doesn't dramatically narrow a pilot's possibilities:

AB without fuel: +135% speed
AB with fuel: +210% speed
MWD without fuel: +325% speed, +325% sig radius
MWD with fuel: +500% speed, +500% sig radius

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#288 - 2015-05-07 16:47:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.

Howabout combine my script idea and your fuel idea, leave in fitting decisions but keep them broad so that one choice doesn't dramatically narrow a pilot's possibilities:

AB without fuel: +135% speed
AB with fuel: +210% speed
MWD without fuel: +325% speed, +325% sig radius
MWD with fuel: +500% speed, +500% sig radius


Fuel AB is OP.

AB script shouldn't consume fuel, while MWD script should only work with fuel under such a system.

Speed boost amounts for said scripts could be left as current AB/MWDs are. vOv How would the capacitor penalty work then? Instant -20% on switching script? Blink

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
Arla Sarain
#289 - 2015-05-07 16:55:16 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


Except, y'know, that removes the fitting decision.


So two new types of charges to carry in the cargo hold.


Not if the fuel is strontium
Twisted
Lidia Caderu
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#290 - 2015-05-07 18:05:04 UTC
What is the sence of adding new types of MWD's? Two t1 modofications of module were totally enought.
Give -20% to cap to all standard (non-faction) MWD's, so there will no need in one extra module type.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#291 - 2015-05-07 18:53:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
Some quick points about the changes I like:


  • 5MN/50MN/500MN change is fine. Good to distinguish between MWD and AB, and faster to search for the size you want in the market.
  • Happy to see the old-school flavor names coming back (Cold-Gas ArcJets and Y-T8 Overcharged Hydocarbon especially) in some form.
  • Glad to see the T2 versions of the items will have a distinctive bonus (speed boost) compared to the Meta versions. In the past, there was almost no reason to use the T2 because it was inferior in every way. I do think the GJ activation cost is a bit high, as you're already paying for the speed increase with the extra fitting requirements.



Some concerns and things I'd like to see changed or looked at:


  • Disappointed that once again, the Meta0 item is basically inferior in every way. The only use for it will be as a built item for use in manufacturing the T2 version, or for EXTREMELY cheap newbie fits. Please at least keep the speed bonus for the Meta0 the same as the others, so it can be used as a fitting choice when extra fitting room is available.

  • I don't think the Meta level AB/MWD need any speed increase. I feel comfortable with a slight increase for the Faction and Deadspace level modules, but a general increase in speed for all prop mods seems unnecessary and definitely promotes speed creep. Fast ships are already extremely fast, and this will just compound it. When you look at weapon systems that have velocity in their damage formula like missiles, this change is basically another overall nerf to missile damage application, which is already extremely poor in some cases.

  • I would very much like to see a general increase in the amount of cycles it is possible to overheat a Microwarpdrive before you risk burning it out. I can't tell from any of the updated stats in the Google Doc if this will be changed. In-game we only have the Heat Damage and Structure Hitpoints columns, but I'm not 100% sure on the formula for the damage - but a 1MN and 10MN Microwarp drive both have the same amount of Structure Hitpoints (40HP). I find that you can really overheat a 1MN MWD for 2-3 cycles at most before you risk burning it out, and that's with Thermodynamics 5. If you go into a cycle where you're already at 70% damage, you have a really high chance of burning it out after the cycle completes.

  • I'd like to see more module HP added in general to give us more ability to heat, especially with lower skill levels; and either (or additionally) halve the module cycle time and the capacitor time, so we can shut the heat off faster when we don't need it, and better micromanage our heat. That way when we miss a cycle turning off the heat because we're doing so many other things, it won't be as catastrophic.

  • In addition to the above, varying the HP and overheat levels could be another valuable choice when looking at the modules. The "Enduring" level could have more module HP and take less heat damage, for example. Or it could be a faction choice. Some ships like the T3 Destroyers already get a 5%/Level reduction in module heat damage so this would have to be balanced to not make this overpowered, but it would be a valuable choice when choosing modules.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#292 - 2015-05-08 04:19:34 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Masao Kurata wrote:
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


Except, y'know, that removes the fitting decision.


So two new types of charges to carry in the cargo hold.


Not if the fuel is strontium
Twisted


Stront producer detected.

// [PvP Damage Done by Class (Scylla)] //

[Cruisers Online]
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#293 - 2015-05-08 07:06:53 UTC
Arla Sarain wrote:
AB and MWD should just be combined into 1 modules, you add fuel to the module and it behaves like an MWD, otherwise its an AB. Then you wouldn't need to rename anything, speed creep wouldn't be such a problem, the enormous disparity between the two modules would be gone and severe lack of a reason to actually use an AB for anything outside of FW plexs would be irrelevant.

The fuel wouldn't have to be a script and could actually be consumable which is more stuff out of the economy.


I have been advocating this for years. Too bad it won't ever happen.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Tappits
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#294 - 2015-05-08 10:16:33 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

  • Bring back some of the old school flavor names (Cold-Gas!)

    • Why would you go from the old random system to the system we how now that's all streamlined on naming which helps new and old players work out what is what then decide its a cool idea to just be like... "hay guys you know when we made it easy to work out which is the best mod from its name.... well we just put all the names in a random number generator and this is what it is now... o but we are only changing it for MWD's"

    ******** change is ********.
    Zappity
    New Eden Tank Testing Services
    #295 - 2015-05-08 11:16:37 UTC
    Tappits wrote:
    CCP Larrikin wrote:

  • Bring back some of the old school flavor names (Cold-Gas!)

    • Why would you go from the old random system to the system we how now that's all streamlined on naming which helps new and old players work out what is what then decide its a cool idea to just be like... "hay guys you know when we made it easy to work out which is the best mod from its name.... well we just put all the names in a random number generator and this is what it is now... o but we are only changing it for MWD's"

    ******** change is ********.

    They are not only changing it for these modules. All module groups are being rebalanced and renamed.

    The prop mods names were just awful. Far too bland compared to the old goodness.

    Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
    Lidia Caderu
    Brave Newbies Inc.
    Brave Collective
    #296 - 2015-05-08 12:05:01 UTC
    Ransu Asanari wrote:
    Some quick points about the changes I like:

    I don't think the Meta level AB/MWD need any speed increase. I feel comfortable with a slight increase for the Faction and Deadspace level modules, but a general increase in speed for all prop mods seems unnecessary and definitely promotes speed creep. Fast ships are already extremely fast, and this will just compound it. When you look at weapon systems that have velocity in their damage formula like missiles, this change is basically another overall nerf to missile damage application, which is already extremely poor in some cases.


    Agree, speed creep ia already too big. On a caldary ship 5% will give nothing, but on minmatar interceptor it will a big bonus under boosts.
    Mystical Might
    Eclipse Pulsar
    Fraternity.
    #297 - 2015-05-08 12:55:55 UTC
    Lidia Caderu wrote:
    Ransu Asanari wrote:
    Some quick points about the changes I like:

    I don't think the Meta level AB/MWD need any speed increase. I feel comfortable with a slight increase for the Faction and Deadspace level modules, but a general increase in speed for all prop mods seems unnecessary and definitely promotes speed creep. Fast ships are already extremely fast, and this will just compound it. When you look at weapon systems that have velocity in their damage formula like missiles, this change is basically another overall nerf to missile damage application, which is already extremely poor in some cases.


    Agree, speed creep ia already too big. On a caldary ship 5% will give nothing, but on minmatar interceptor it will a big bonus under boosts.


    So nerf the minmatar interceptor downwards just a tad bit, to keep the speeds the same?
    Lidia Caderu
    Brave Newbies Inc.
    Brave Collective
    #298 - 2015-05-08 12:56:33 UTC
    Mystical Might wrote:
    Lidia Caderu wrote:
    Ransu Asanari wrote:
    Some quick points about the changes I like:

    I don't think the Meta level AB/MWD need any speed increase. I feel comfortable with a slight increase for the Faction and Deadspace level modules, but a general increase in speed for all prop mods seems unnecessary and definitely promotes speed creep. Fast ships are already extremely fast, and this will just compound it. When you look at weapon systems that have velocity in their damage formula like missiles, this change is basically another overall nerf to missile damage application, which is already extremely poor in some cases.


    Agree, speed creep ia already too big. On a caldary ship 5% will give nothing, but on minmatar interceptor it will a big bonus under boosts.


    So nerf the minmatar interceptor downwards just a tad bit, to keep the speeds the same?

    What if I have AB fit?
    Sieonigh
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #299 - 2015-05-08 19:29:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Sieonigh
    i feel the republic fleet, domination and the gist ABs are getting a RAW deal here

    Module..................................................type..........meta.....PG......CPU....CAP cost......speed boost.....overload
    Federation Navy 100MN Afterburner.......Faction........8 (+1)...625......55........240 (-80)............145 (+4)..........50
    Shadow Serpentis 100MN Afterburner...Faction..........8 (+1)...625......55........240 (-80)............145 (+4)..........50
    Republic Fleet 100MN Afterburner..........Faction..........8.........688......50........320 (+79)...........145 (+1)..........50
    Domination 100MN Afterburner...............Faction..........8.........688......50........320 (+79)...........145 (+1)..........50
    Core C-Type 100MN Afterburner.........Deadspace.....10 (-1)....625......58........240 (-1)...............150................50
    Gist C-Type 100MN Afterburner...........Deadspace.....10 (-1)....750......50........320...................150 (-3).........50

    this pattern is consistent with all higher meta ABs and all sizes
    as you can see here the cap cost for the RF, domi and gist have been majorly nerfed while the galeti equivalent has been buffed, both are now the same speed with the RF/ Domi one only being 5 less CPU benifit.

    so now its gonna be a no brainer when it comes to choosing faction and deadspace ABs

    make RF/domi/ gist AB faster to their meta counterparts for it to be worth the cap cost, otherwise they will not be worth it.
    Little Kicks
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #300 - 2015-05-08 21:52:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Little Kicks
    Lochiel wrote:
    How about having the order of the name be
    nMN [Modifier Name] [Flavor Name] [MWD|AB]

    So that when I search for "5MN Restrained" I get exactly the module I was looking for?


    I agree with moving flavor names towards the back. They seem unnecessary, but at least keep them out of the way.

    edit: I really like the 1/5 10/50 100/500 distinction. Let different modules group differently. (and keep the EFT tears flowing..)