These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[implants] Rebalance slave sets
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Heidi Beldrulf
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2015-05-04 16:01:49 UTC
Instead of nerfing things why don't you ask CCP for shield HP implants.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#22 - 2015-05-04 16:47:37 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
You can talk about reducing the buffer advantage of armor tanks when shields stop regenerating on their own.


Plz. Passive regen is a joke for anything except PvE. Besides, armor has about 6 resistance and buffer options. While half of the shield options are focused on passive regen, and require you to literally sacrifice every slot on your ship except weapons but including dps mods to utilize them. And at least one of those (Shield Flux Coils) is complete trash.

And we won't even get into the sigRad bloom from extenders and shield rigs.

Armor has so many advantages over shields its not even funny.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
WarFireV
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2015-05-04 17:11:10 UTC  |  Edited by: WarFireV
If you want to get into a Shield vs Armor debate, that is really a different topic altogether. As for Slaves? You want to nerf something next to no one uses? why? I mean they might get a little bit more use then most of the implate sets, but not by much.

Only armor supers and blinged out carebears use HG slave sets. Shield supers already have more EHP compared to armor even with slave sets so I don't get that argument and most carebears would actually be better off using a different implate set.

The only thing that leaves are wormhole people who might use slave sets because most wormholes tend to over bling their T3s and that is about as niche as it can get. Majority of other small gang people who do use implates regularly, use nomad or crystal sets.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2015-05-04 17:20:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Xequecal
Shield supercaps (technically, regular caps do too if you pack deadspace **** on them, but that's not worth it) have more EHP than armor supercaps do even with a full slave set plugged in. I have no idea why anyone is complaining about slaves.

An A-type EANM increases your EHP by 54.77%. An A-type invulnerability field increases your EHP by 88.125%, AND you can overload it. Even if for some reason you only have a single hardener on your supercap, you're already getting more EHP than slaves provide by overloading that one hardener.
lord xavier
Rubbed Out
#25 - 2015-05-04 17:21:20 UTC  |  Edited by: lord xavier
James Baboli wrote:
Slave sets are one of those thing which everyone knows about, and which have a major shifting influence on the sandbox, but which no one really seems to talk about much. Like many things which have been with us since the early days of eve, they have had an enormous effect on what doctrines and playstyles emerged. The ability for armor tanks to add more than 50% of their base HP in armor without a single concession on the fitting, in a way which scales absolutely with buffer mods, rigs and so on, is far more powerful in the modern eve era than the shield boost bonus that crystal sets give. That this extends to capitals, unlike crystal sets, just tips them further over the line.

I think it is time to tone them down.

Overall, I would like to see slave sets effectiveness dropped to approximately:

HG: 32%
MG: 26%
LG 18%

I would prefer to accomplish this by reducing primarily the per implant set bonus, and slightly reducing the HP bonus on slots 3-5, to 2.5%, 3% and 3.5% respectively.

Why:

  1. Armor capitals are too tough relative to shield capitals, and this helps even that out.
  2. Buffer bonuses are inherently more powerful than rep bonuses with modern fleet sizes for fleet combat.
  3. Oversized plates and slave synergize unfortunately well on t3s, HACs and other cruisers with the space for large plates.
  4. It makes finding a competitive shield doctrine easier, and I like shield doctrines.



Why change an implant set that isnt broken. The only thing broken is how there is not a Shield set to copy what the Slaves do. Which I think they tried to fix a few years back during the HP nerf on supers. Though I am not 100% certain on that. This makes the use of shield capitals less likely do to the less buffer. Especially in regards to crystals being absolutely useless on capital shield boosters that supers already do not use. This is why armor capitals have the advantage over shield as there is not an implant set to mimic the same results.

Slaves are also not used in every super. Depending on the use of the capital, other implants tend to prove more useful.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2015-05-04 19:30:00 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
Shield supercaps (technically, regular caps do too if you pack deadspace **** on them, but that's not worth it) have more EHP than armor supercaps do even with a full slave set plugged in. I have no idea why anyone is complaining about slaves.

An A-type EANM increases your EHP by 54.77%. An A-type invulnerability field increases your EHP by 88.125%, AND you can overload it. Even if for some reason you only have a single hardener on your supercap, you're already getting more EHP than slaves provide by overloading that one hardener.


Wouldn't one expect this given it is active vs passive module? That ENAM still works if you're capped out.

A better compare would be the passive mods vs passive mods.

But perhaps redundant...things are just different.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#27 - 2015-05-04 19:43:06 UTC
Sorry but I'm having a hard time agreeing with the OP. I don't see much of an issue with them tbh.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#28 - 2015-05-05 10:52:58 UTC
Baboli you know i like you but i am throughy unconvinced about your central premise...

"want to find shield docterines" have you missed the tengu's and ishtars everywhere? I get they make titans rather tanky but a leviathan with a full rack of power diagnostics in the lows has the same redonculous EHP pool as avatars and erebuses... Its amazing how the math works out when you can fit Brick HP in one set of slots and resists in an entirely different set of slots...

Now if your case had been something like "slave sets are excellent even on shield boats" then i might have listened to your case but your current series of arguments are thoroughly lacking to (atleast) my examination. And on shieldboats you prolly want sig radius or aligntime anyways, although on titans and supers i see why you'd default to HG slaves all day every day...

Also Solo marauders with XL ASB with crystals also seem HILARIOUSLY imba and active tanked hyperions are still hilarious no matter what people say for soloing
Jenshae Chiroptera
#29 - 2015-05-05 11:01:22 UTC
Rather have a shield and hull bonus set of implants.

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.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#30 - 2015-05-05 14:18:50 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Rather have a shield and hull bonus set of implants.



This. Not much hate for the slaves. not their fault ccp is not expanding the range. For shields To be honest I'd even be open to the caveat of some sig radius hit to these to get them. True passive already hits this hard...whats a few more meters really to sig. if you wanted to be slim and skinny sig wise you'd crystal it with active tank.

Hull tanking be an interesting option. Ole boy sees shields melt, thinks aww yeah. Sees armour getting tore up....smells the blood. Then hits the wall of hull hp and goes wtf.....
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#31 - 2015-05-05 15:17:17 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Rather have a shield and hull bonus set of implants.



This. Not much hate for the slaves. not their fault ccp is not expanding the range. For shields To be honest I'd even be open to the caveat of some sig radius hit to these to get them. True passive already hits this hard...whats a few more meters really to sig. if you wanted to be slim and skinny sig wise you'd crystal it with active tank.

Hull tanking be an interesting option. Ole boy sees shields melt, thinks aww yeah. Sees armour getting tore up....smells the blood. Then hits the wall of hull hp and goes wtf.....

yeah, but 400k+ EHP megas in hull would be absolutely infuriating.


So, to those going "Don't nerf slaves, add shield+hull buffer implants or buff crystals" is anyone willing to put a set of numbers down to open that discussion?

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Openus Legimus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#32 - 2015-05-30 23:34:45 UTC

Your main premise is that slaves sets are broken and have had a major affect on Eve, thus they need to changed/nerfed.

This premise is incorrect, thus your everything that follows it is null.

Slaves have had very little affect on Eve and how Eve is played.
1. High grade slave sets only make consistent appearances in super pods. It hasn't broken super warfare. Outside of this you won't normally find slave sets in any fleet comps or doctrines or even in solo heads. Too many ways for a pod to die.
2. High grade slaves are used rarely with active tanked no buffer solo ships like the Hyperion to make up for their lack of buffer. Solo has all of the cards stacked against it anyway. Additionally this has had 0 affect on Eve, doctrines, or related metas.
3. High grade slaves are used more commonly with pirate battleships in small and midsized low sec gangs (Bhaalgorns, Vindicators) because you get more bang for your bug due to the EHP, because of the need the enemy has to get them off the field, the cost of the BS and its desire to be protected etc. This hasn't broken the game and has had very little affect on the game. BS, even slaved faction BS still get destroyed blap dreads, and plenty of other things. They aren't invulnerable and the slaves aren't causing people to sit around and try to figure out a counter for them (Ishtars anyone?)


These are 99% of their current uses in Eve Online, and in none of these examples are people sitting around talking about how broken they are, on either side.

I think you had a bad experience with a small gang who was all in slaves (like Exodus flying only snake heads) and now have a skewed view of Eve.

If you had tried to make a different point, with a different premise, perhaps that a general balance was necessary because some things about implants, and which implants exist doesn't make sense, and could overall be better implemented, then you could have made that point, and it would have had some merit.

As it stands, high grade slaves are not having the negative and imba impact on the game you think they are.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#33 - 2015-05-31 01:34:25 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Both implant sets are hardly comparable as they function in starkly different setups. Crystals have no use in big fleet fights and are not used in these scenarios. Slaves work well in fleets, but are not used in big fleets, especially not HG or MG, as their cost is prohibitive to the high likelihood of losing your capsule. Slaves on small and medium fleet doctrines like Low sec Sacrileges and Absolutions only work because you cannot lose your capsule. Slaves on caps can be seen as problematic, but as this is only one small group of ships compared to, for instance, where Crystals are very effective (Solo Tengus, Shield Boosting Marauders, Sleipnirs, etc pp.), I don't really see a need to change Slaves.

Instead of reducing Slave effects, call for the introduction of a Shield Buffer set and Armor Repair set.


Agreed.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#34 - 2015-05-31 01:37:18 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Slave sets are one of those thing which everyone knows about, and which have a major shifting influence on the sandbox, but which no one really seems to talk about much. Like many things which have been with us since the early days of eve, they have had an enormous effect on what doctrines and playstyles emerged. The ability for armor tanks to add more than 50% of their base HP in armor without a single concession on the fitting, in a way which scales absolutely with buffer mods, rigs and so on, is far more powerful in the modern eve era than the shield boost bonus that crystal sets give. That this extends to capitals, unlike crystal sets, just tips them further over the line.

I think it is time to tone them down.

Overall, I would like to see slave sets effectiveness dropped to approximately:

HG: 32%
MG: 26%
LG 18%

I would prefer to accomplish this by reducing primarily the per implant set bonus, and slightly reducing the HP bonus on slots 3-5, to 2.5%, 3% and 3.5% respectively.

Why:

  1. Armor capitals are too tough relative to shield capitals, and this helps even that out.
  2. Buffer bonuses are inherently more powerful than rep bonuses with modern fleet sizes for fleet combat.
  3. Oversized plates and slave synergize unfortunately well on t3s, HACs and other cruisers with the space for large plates.
  4. It makes finding a competitive shield doctrine easier, and I like shield doctrines.


If they lower the cost of implants sets by 50% then maybe, but I seriously doubt that would happen, so I disagree.
-1
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#35 - 2015-05-31 01:40:04 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
To be completely fair to armor users everywhere, shield already gets a base hp buff from just the skills, so having a slave set isn't to unbalanced. It's just the natural outcome from armor boats with hp bonuses or high resists that they gain so much ehp. Slaves just have a tendency to be used on higher-level armor boats simply because they can sport such high natural resists, and it's easier to fit for them than shields are.

That said, I do support your idea with reducing their effectiveness. Cruiser and battlecruiser hulls reaching over a half a million ehp is absurd.


At the cost of 2.5 bill isk in implants. It's a fair trade off.
Dregalis DeGraiden
Doomheim
#36 - 2015-05-31 01:50:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Dregalis DeGraiden
Soldarius wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
You can talk about reducing the buffer advantage of armor tanks when shields stop regenerating on their own.


Plz. Passive regen is a joke for anything except PvE. Besides, armor has about 6 resistance and buffer options. While half of the shield options are focused on passive regen, and require you to literally sacrifice every slot on your ship except weapons but including dps mods to utilize them. And at least one of those (Shield Flux Coils) is complete trash.

And we won't even get into the sigRad bloom from extenders and shield rigs.

Armor has so many advantages over shields its not even funny.


My Crystal mid-grade set dual XL-ASB fitted Sleipnir disagree with you.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#37 - 2015-05-31 03:33:44 UTC  |  Edited by: elitatwo
Daniela Doran wrote:
...At the cost of 2.5 bill isk in implants. It's a fair trade off.


Actually it's 6x 80 million isk + 80.000LP from the Blood Raider LP store.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#38 - 2015-05-31 03:48:55 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
...At the cost of 2.5 bill isk in implants. It's a fair trade off.


Actually it's 6x 80 million isk + 80.000LP from the Blood Raider LP store.


I'm missing out on something here. Please fill me in elita..
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#39 - 2015-05-31 04:17:14 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
...At the cost of 2.5 bill isk in implants. It's a fair trade off.


Actually it's 6x 80 million isk + 80.000LP from the Blood Raider LP store.


You are drastically off on how much a Slave set costs from the Sansha's LP store.

Quote:
http://www.ellatha.com/eve/lp/True-Power

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

Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#40 - 2015-05-31 07:48:53 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
...At the cost of 2.5 bill isk in implants. It's a fair trade off.


Actually it's 6x 80 million isk + 80.000LP from the Blood Raider LP store.


You are drastically off on how much a Slave set costs from the Sansha's LP store.

Quote:
http://www.ellatha.com/eve/lp/True-Power


Which is??