Player Features and Ideas Discussion

the reason why you feel like normal afterburners aren't very good is probably because webs are too strong, and turrets at range are free from having to think about tracking, which leads to afterburners not really doing their job. I think fixing damage mitigation would be a better idea than making silly new things.

are you going to nerf my 100MN MWD Prophecy? :(

Overall I like the balance pass. The one issue I still have is with the changes to activation cost. I view activation cost much like a fitting cost it affects how long I can use other modules simultaneously. I typically use, and own several, Gistum 10MN MWD on my cruisers. Suddenly my cap life is going down.


So in order to to make the Gallente based mods have better comparative activation cost the Minmitar mods are getting what seems the shorter end of the rebalance stick.

Corelum C-Type 50MN Microwarpdrive Deadspace 10 (-1) 150 58 160 (-20) -7 (+1) 450 (+17) 514 (+14) 50
Gistum C-Type 50MN Microwarpdrive Deadspace 10 (-1) 173 (-7) 50 180 (+30) -7 (+1) 430 (-14) 514 (+14) 50

Looking at the changes with the C-Type 50MN mod:

• The Gistum gains 7 Power grid, but it was already being fit, so marginal benefit to current owners.


• CPU stays the same for both.


• Activation cost for the Gistum increased from 150 to 180, +30 or a 20% increase in activation cost. The Corelum reduced activation
from 180 to 160, -20 or ~11% relative reduction.


• They both gain +1% cap capacity and 14% speed boost..


• Gistum reduces 444 sig bloom down to 430, -14% ~3.25% benefit to sig radius. While the Corelum goes from 433 to 450. +17 ~4% relative increase.

I understand you built it wrong before and are fixing it to be in line with proper lore and design. It is just frustrating to see this happen. I see it is a fairly even swap of stats, but it in essence has flipped half the fitting stats of the module and thus anyone that used it with cap use in mind might be a little disappointed.

I guess am not asking for you to change anything, since I understand why you are doing it. I just am not happy about it since I tend to use lower activation modules currently, and I will have to either switch or decide if I like the smaller signature instead.

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. Please continue.

Many T2 items are straight up better with marginally higher fitting costs. But Prop mods seem to get a double hit with fitting and with activation cost. They get 10% more PG and 10% more activation.

Look at Adaptive Invulnerability Fields, the T2 has 10% more CPU fitting but less activation cost.
Engergy Neuts have higher PG, same CPU, same activation cost.
Armor and shield reps get same activation cost but have higher fittings for both PG and CPU.

It seems T2 prop mods are one of the few to get an activation increase for its technological advancements.

Edit: ECM are similar to prop mods, they have increased activation and fitting. Only difference is the meta 4 is equal stats so no one uses T2 if they can avoid it.

I do wish that T2 were more attractive overall. Removing the increase to activation would be enough for me to like it more.

i think 500% sig bloom is too high a penalty and this is a good opportunity too reduce that penalty . go with

- 300% as base on all mwds
- 250% on restrained mwd's

oh.. i'm so convinced now

'So unanimous'

This is why you are still in BNI. So let me explain with some simple math. The below formula is abbreviated for clarity. The formula in its entirety is available here.

In the case of missiles when a velocity damage reduction is applied, applied damage = raw damage * (signature radius / explosion radius * explosion velocity / velocity).

Increasing just your velocity will decrease applied damage by 50% of its previous amount. But if you also increase your signature radius by a like amount, you will not see any change in applied damage. A similar effect happens to turrets, though the exact formula is different and non-linear.

Thus, afterburners are more desirable for applied damage reduction than MWD. MWD has other advantages. This is also what makes MWD sigRad bloom reduction bonuses on AFs and HACs, and AB velocity bonus on Sansha ships so useful.

Yeah, your points are not without merrit. We're going to see how the usage of T2 MWD's changes. I wouldn't be surprised if we make some tweaks


\o/


Whats your reasoning for this?


Hi Phaade, are you talking about AB speed or MWD speed?


Could you expand a little more on this? Have you checked the differences in AB speeds?



Also these changes should be up on Sisi early next week.

Do not change this. Keep it at 500%. The 500% sig bloom is designed to make up for the fact that the ship is going 500% faster. This means that the ship doesn't benefit from the speed increase when it comes to tracking according to the turret tracking formula and missile tracking formula.

Edit: It would also be cool if webs were effective proportionally to the size of the ship. Say a web applies X force to slow a ship down. That X force is going to be more effective on smaller ships, and less effective on larger ships. Just a cool idea for when webs are rebalanced.