Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I don't think you have carefully enough read through other people's calculations regarding stacking penalties then to understand my concerns. Those concerns lie on top of the nerfed stats being useless.

Regarding wormhole effects -- certainly good points.

I ignored everything else since it's either needless grandstanding or misguided accusations based on the assumption that year-old videos edited for entertainment value are factual documentaries.

Thats a lot of math to arrive at the conclusion that using 3 of the same mod under stacking penalties is going to afford less of a benefit than using 3 mods without a stacking penalty, and that mixing mods under a stacking penalty won't suffer as much as a hit compared to doing the same mixed mods without a stacking penalty...

There are 2 things that need to happen here.

1) Are the new modules effectively offering a comparable alternative to current Rig options. That answer is a resounding no with adjusted numbers.

2) Are the new modules effectively allowing Missile boats to hit similar application values as Turrets for the same fitting cost. That answer is and always has been a resounding no.

To solve 1:
The combined benefit of new module bonuses must be equal to or greater than the benefit provided by a single rig slot. This can be done 1 of 2 ways, Create one module for Range Boosting, 1 module for Application boosting, or split the values to apply Explosion Velocity OR Explosion Radius AND Missile Flight Time OR Missile Velocity. Effectively representing 2 Rigs slots, but at halved value (from the proposal)

To solve 2:
The valuation of bonuses needs to be higher so Missiles ships are required to fit the same number of modules for the same effect OR The base valuations of missiles themselves need to be adjusted to facilitate the use of less overall modules needed to achieve the same effect.

Why do this for 1:
If Mid slot and Low Slot options are not effectively comparable to rig slots, then it is quite obvious they will not be used, they are inferior to bonus, and there are simply better alternatives to use in these slots comparatively.

Why do this for 2:
Missile ships should not need 3-4 modules to effectively represent the same application compared to Turret options which amount to 1TC+Script. It is simple functionality in what world would anyone choose to use a missile boat over a turret boat, when they need to dedicate more fitting slots to achieve the same application.

These modules will be very nice to have assuming they are implemented correctly. The 2 goals in this should be.
1) Provide modules that facilitate options for fitting comparable to Rigs (with fitting requirements considered)
2) Increase missile application to a comparable level of Turrets.

If you can not make those things happen collectively. Then there is no reason to create these modules.

Rigors and Flares are not stacking penalized now, and people are still not using whole classes of missiles. There was no need to go to all that trouble because you will never convince anyone that it's worth sacrificing a slew of mids for a tiny bit more range/application when you can get similar results with rigs. At this stage all we need to know is:

1) Will rigors and flares be stacking penalized?
2) Will rigors and flares also be stacking penalized with the new modules?

If the answer to these two questions are yes then Missiles got nerfed again, there is no debate.

Pretty much all of them since Flares have no relative impact in situations where a targets speed is lower than the MVF, or the Sig is larger than the explosion radius both scenarios in which Rigors have a heavier weight in determining overall outcome. Even with stacking penalties 3x Rigor will have more universal damage application than 2 and 1 Flare.

Because...EVE is not a vacuum and math like you did is mostly irrelevant in terms of overall usage.

They hit really hard, but they melted. This was the fight:

https://www.themittani.com/news/fountain-temptation

I was focusing on repairing the friendly Titan most of that fight, so did not make it on too many killmails, but it was hands down the most fun I ever had in a large Eve brawl. When those Ravens first showed up, I thought they were going to take down the Titan.

Sorry, but with such level of argumentation (when you ignore the fact that strengths of bonuses are different) i don't think there's any point to continue this discussion.

o7

If i may point out that you vehemently ask everyone to consider things in practice rather than just the raw math of it, then you say that 3 rigors are better than 2 rigors and a flare because "you will have tackle, therefore speed isn't a concern".

But for heavy missiles, i would point out that you have tackle on those pesky small frigates.... They're dead anyways, regardless of 2 rigors 1 flare or 3 rigors. They're frigates. That are tackled.

Therefore, for heavy missiles (cruise is a different matter), better application for the edge cases where a ship is kiting or moving quickly through bubbles / across the grid, 2 rigors 1 flare is better, precisely because it does cover those no tackle edge cases slightly better.

Rise has not gotten back to us on the stacking penalties. There is still hope. At least we got the fleet warp changes delayed and potentialy revised... fingers crossed.

If there are no stacking penalties on rigs for each other or to these modules, then we will just have to wait and see how their performance is in REAL pvp. Here's hoping for the next expansion to throw a percentage point and a half on all the values for these.

I'm surprised that the rest of the launcher tiericide wasn't completed prior to this project.
The light missile launchers were combined effectively which seemed to pave the way for the rest of the launchers but here we are many months later and not a peep about when the rest of the launchers will be completed.
I don't suppose the remainder of the launcher Tiericide will be taking place in conjunction with these changes?
If not then when?

Ah, I'd hoped they were shooting subcaps. Caps are glorious fury targets.

I shall hold out hope for a good subcap bash.

You forgot to mention additional condition of shooting ship which is not just webbed, but has smaller sig than 2xt2 rigor rigged missile of the type you're using. With stacking penalized rigors, the target signatures of:

torps - 223m
cruise missiles - 163m
heavy missiles - 69m
hams - 62m
light missiles - 19.8m
rockets - 9.9m

(faction ammo, all 5 skills, ship with no missile er bonuses, no drugs)

will be the breakpoints. If and only if target after all sig modifications (mwd sig blow, tps) has smaller sig radius than specified breakpoint - the 2nd part of formula MAY come into play (and will it come or not depends on target speed and your missile explosion velocity, besides things already mentioned). And only if all these conditions are met, then 3rd rigor is better than t2 flare.

But - from my perspective - if you're shooting 2x 90% webbed and scrammed interceptors with cruise missiles, or didn't bring a few TPs to shoot cruisers with torps (loltorps), you're doing it wrong, hence i asked for a specific example. But obviously this is far from 'real-world', thus no examples were provided.

I maintain my point - triple rigors even in current state are better only for solo HAM ships shooting hard-tackled frigs and maybe for phoenix doing some work on subcap hulls (i'm not into capitals so can't judge). For 99% of other 'real-world' cases t2 flare is just better because it has stronger effect on 3rd part of missile formula.

Thus, if you did something which belongs to these usecases, you will see significant drop of efficiency of triple-rigor fit. Otherwise - switch to 2 rigor + flare and it will be hard to see a difference.