These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kione Keikira
Perkone
Caldari State
#301 - 2015-05-08 22:53:21 UTC
The fact that the only reason to choose between Shadow Serpentis and Federation Navy modules is cost should be changed. Give them some sort of difference to make there be a case where the other is bought.

Master of being misunderstood.
Lucas Quaan
Descendance.
GoonSwarm.
#302 - 2015-05-08 23:52:16 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

  • Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 50; CPU 28; Activation 60 (-20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Shadow Serpentis 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 50; CPU 28; Activation 60 (-20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Republic Fleet 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 55; CPU 25; Activation 80 (+20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Domination 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 55; CPU 25; Activation 80 (+20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]

...

  • Federation Navy 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 625; CPU 55; Activation 240 (-80); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Shadow Serpentis 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 625; CPU 55; Activation 240 (-80); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Republic Fleet 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 688; CPU 50; Activation 320 (+79); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Domination 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 688; CPU 50; Activation 320 (+79); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]

I feel like these two groups could use some tweaking. With the velocity bonus being the same you sort of shafted the RF/Domi versions. The CPU diff is really too little to matter on the cruiser/BS level when you consider the fact that FN/SS use both less grid AND cap. Why would you ever pick the other two?

I guess it can sort of balance out for frigs, but I think you need to keep some of the speed diff too, tbh. Scale back FN/SS to 140% would be my suggestion to keep the trade-off.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#303 - 2015-05-09 03:47:30 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Lucas Quaan wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:

  • Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 50; CPU 28; Activation 60 (-20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Shadow Serpentis 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 50; CPU 28; Activation 60 (-20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Republic Fleet 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 55; CPU 25; Activation 80 (+20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Domination 10MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 55; CPU 25; Activation 80 (+20); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]

...

  • Federation Navy 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 625; CPU 55; Activation 240 (-80); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Shadow Serpentis 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8 (+1); Powergrid 625; CPU 55; Activation 240 (-80); Velocity Bonus 145 (+4)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Republic Fleet 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 688; CPU 50; Activation 320 (+79); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]
  • Domination 100MN Afterburner [Meta Level 8; Powergrid 688; CPU 50; Activation 320 (+79); Velocity Bonus 145 (+1)%; Overload Bonus 50%]

I feel like these two groups could use some tweaking. With the velocity bonus being the same you sort of shafted the RF/Domi versions. The CPU diff is really too little to matter on the cruiser/BS level when you consider the fact that FN/SS use both less grid AND cap. Why would you ever pick the other two?

I guess it can sort of balance out for frigs, but I think you need to keep some of the speed diff too, tbh. Scale back FN/SS to 140% would be my suggestion to keep the trade-off.


The only reason I used RF and Domination afterburners before was because they used less cap. Seems really obnoxious to shaft them like that.

The old split of "fuel efficient" versus "more speed" made perfect sense. Having one use more powergrid and the other use more CPU makes sense too. But, higher capacitor consumption needs something to balance it out versus the counterpart module.

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

Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#304 - 2015-05-09 12:51:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Sieonigh
Module....................................type..........meta.....PG......CPU....CAP cost..cap pen..sig pen..speed...OL
Federation Navy 500MN Micro......Faction....8 (+2)....1250....83....270....-10 (+4)....470 (-19)....512 (+12) ....50
Shadow Serpentis 500MN Micro....Faction....8 (+2)....1250....83....270....-10 (+4)....470 (-19)....512 (+12)....50
Republic Fleet 500MN Micro......Faction........8......1375.....75.....320 (-4).....-10 (+1).....450 (-17).....512 (+12).....50
Domination 500MN Micro......Faction..........8......1375.....75.....320 (-4).....-10 (+1).....450 (-17).....512 (+12).....50
Core C-Type 500MN Micro..Deadspace...10 (-1)...1250.....87.....320 (-4).....-7 (+1).....430 (-3).....514 (+14).....50
Gist C-Type 500MN Micro..Deadspace..10 (-1)...1500.....75.....270........-7 (+1).....440 (-4).....514 (+14).....50

tried to line them up best as i could,

why has the traits of the gist and core been reversed?
you do know gist is from angels right? and there for should be like the domintaion as well as the core to be like the serpentice one.

here you have the core with the lower sig penalty then the gist.
you also switched the cap cost too, core is meant to be the conservative one and gist is meant to be the costly one
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#305 - 2015-05-10 03:10:41 UTC
I'm still of the opinion that the names should be formatted in some kind of consistent way:

(FLUFF name) (PROPERTY) (X MN) Afterburner/Microwarp Drive

Right now you have some modules starting with "1MN" and ending with "Afterburner" and others with these two right next to each other. If there is a hierarchy it isn't clear, and some people are going to still search "1MN Afterburner" and miss results because of this formatting.

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#306 - 2015-05-10 06:05:23 UTC
Chance Ravinne wrote:
I'm still of the opinion that the names should be formatted in some kind of consistent way:

(FLUFF name) (PROPERTY) (X MN) Afterburner/Microwarp Drive

Right now you have some modules starting with "1MN" and ending with "Afterburner" and others with these two right next to each other. If there is a hierarchy it isn't clear, and some people are going to still search "1MN Afterburner" and miss results because of this formatting.


Yess. (ง ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)ง

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

[Cruisers Online]
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#307 - 2015-05-10 06:54:46 UTC
Chance Ravinne wrote:
I'm still of the opinion that the names should be formatted in some kind of consistent way:

(FLUFF name) (PROPERTY) (X MN) Afterburner/Microwarp Drive

Right now you have some modules starting with "1MN" and ending with "Afterburner" and others with these two right next to each other. If there is a hierarchy it isn't clear, and some people are going to still search "1MN Afterburner" and miss results because of this formatting.

Would make sense, especially considering that all the modules except for the T1 meta versions have their explicative text bits in front of the class numeration.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#308 - 2015-05-10 08:07:05 UTC
This would be a non-issue if there would be a fuzzy search ...

I'm my own NPC alt.
Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#309 - 2015-05-10 13:24:32 UTC
yay a bonus to all the ******* kiters in the world with this speed bonus.
can't you go nerf kiters instead?
DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan
#310 - 2015-05-10 13:24:37 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Goals of Module Tiericide
  • Reduce unnecessary complexity
  • Provide meaningful options within the module set


Changes
  • Give a speed bonus to higher meta Microwarpdrives
  • Renaming MWDs to 5MN, 50MN and 500MN
  • Bring back some of the old school flavor names (Cold-Gas!)
  • Differentiate Officer mods from Deadspace mods
  • Fix some flavor issues with Faction mods


Q: What happens to my meta (Limited/Experimental) modules
A: This -
  • "Limited 1MN Afterburner I" become "1MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner"
  • "Experimental 1MN Afterburner I" become "1MN Monopropellant Enduring Afterburner"
  • "Experimental 10MN Afterburner I" become "10MN Monopropellant Enduring Afterburner"
  • "Experimental 100MN Afterburner I" become "100MN Monopropellant Enduring Afterburner"
  • "Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I" become "5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive"
  • "Upgraded 1MN Microwarpdrive I" become "5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive"
  • "Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I" become "50MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive"
  • "Prototype 100MN Microwarpdrive I" become "500MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive"
KISS = keep it simple stupid

The first reason is... If limited and *** equal compact... why not just remove the extra *** and just make them all limited. Same for experimental and prototype equaling enduring; just remove the longer term and call all the names from that grouping prototype.

The second reason is players are already used to the names limited and prototype. Search fields and bookmarks and your wiki would require yet another ridiculous, unnecessary update.

The third reason is adding an extra name just for a namesake is not needed and increases obscurity.

ex: "Upgraded 1MN Microwarpdrive I" become "5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive"...
Ok, so simply call it "5MN Upgraded Microwarpdrive I"
or maybe "5MN Enduring Microwarpdrive" (if you have to go with the enduring/compact changes).
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#311 - 2015-05-11 00:48:11 UTC
Henry Plantgenet wrote:
yay a bonus to all the ******* kiters in the world with this speed bonus.
can't you go nerf kiters instead?


This cannot be echoed or said enough in this thread. One of the biggest complaints about the game presently is that the ship meta is stale and brittle, and a good part of this is because speed is king.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#312 - 2015-05-11 04:01:52 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
Henry Plantgenet wrote:
yay a bonus to all the ******* kiters in the world with this speed bonus.
can't you go nerf kiters instead?


This cannot be echoed or said enough in this thread. One of the biggest complaints about the game presently is that the ship meta is stale and brittle, and a good part of this is because speed is king.


Speed will always be king, so long as it gives massive tactical AND operational advantages.

CCP should really be taking a hard look at re-balancing tactical level (on-grid) fights - making sure there is a place for all six ship classes. Slowing the faster classes down some and increasing the warp-to range to 200km would help a great deal.

Then they can start looking at the operational level - how people get to the grid to fight. How quickly reinforcements can arrive, etc.

Just maybe, if they get the above right, they might even have a chance of getting the strategic level properly adjusted - i.e. why people fight.

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

Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#313 - 2015-05-11 08:45:04 UTC
Go post in the CSM fora about the stale meta.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#314 - 2015-05-11 19:37:18 UTC
I'd like to see a super fast anti-kite MWD for burning down and tackling kiters with extreme speed and extreme cap usage (but no cap penalty) so it can only be used in bursts. Maybe a built in penalty on using capbooster to stop kiters abusing it.

Another MWD for kiters which would be slower than the current meta

and another with low fitting and cap usage for use by tight fits, and ships with cap issues: especially amarr, and snipers who just need it to keep range against ab fit brawlers.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#315 - 2015-05-12 00:54:09 UTC
Keikaku Intensifies

This might have interesting implications for sansha ships. I am taking a wait and see approach. T2 now has reasons to exist.

So far so good. Small tweaks are good. Be prepared to adjust every 24 hours though due to unforeseen keikaku.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#316 - 2015-05-12 00:56:49 UTC
Kione Keikira wrote:
The fact that the only reason to choose between Shadow Serpentis and Federation Navy modules is cost should be changed. Give them some sort of difference to make there be a case where the other is bought.


agreed.

Pirate modules ought to offer a dangerous edge...like more overheat bonus
Navy modules should be more robust (10% less heat generation) or something

just an idea.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#317 - 2015-05-12 06:14:23 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
I'd like to see a super fast anti-kite MWD for burning down and tackling kiters with extreme speed and extreme cap usage (but no cap penalty) so it can only be used in bursts. Maybe a built in penalty on using capbooster to stop kiters abusing it.

Another MWD for kiters which would be slower than the current meta

and another with low fitting and cap usage for use by tight fits, and ships with cap issues: especially amarr, and snipers who just need it to keep range against ab fit brawlers.

Make it an afterburner that has the option to inject cap charges for speed increase. Anti-kiting mod.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#318 - 2015-05-12 12:51:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
AB T2 is at 135% atm .. i would like too see it closer too 160% increase the cap use too 25 ish.. and i would like a restrained version that specialises in low mass addition, so effectively a high agility version, serpentis and fed navy could be the faction version.

compact should be more like 8pg 11 cpu
enduring and 1mn 10pg 14 cpu
1MN AB 11pg 16cpu

and scale that up for 10mn and 100mn's

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
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#319 - 2015-05-12 15:59:06 UTC
A 160% base is 200% skilled.

Do not want.

Not without outsourcing this to a new mid-tier of ABs with ensuing counter-balancing drawbacks - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=419044&find=unread

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

[Cruisers Online]
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#320 - 2015-05-12 16:05:32 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
A 160% base is 200% skilled.

Do not want.

Not without outsourcing this to a new mid-tier of ABs with ensuing counter-balancing drawbacks - https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=419044&find=unread

And then just think about on sansha ships, with links and slaves......

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp