Player Features and Ideas Discussion

BLUF: reduce the CPU drain of expanded probe launchers or introduce fitting bonuses (similar to T3 bonus) on certain ships.

So, I'm a very big fan of combat probing and through that I have also come to love the fitting bonus on T3Ds more than almost any other feature on the ship. Combat probes in of themselves put in place a very interesting mechanic that can allow ships to attempt an engagement against a target that would otherwise be considered safe or relatively safe. Safe tactical a and safe spots are both thrown into risk as soon as the first set of probes is launched. Combat probing itself is also an interesting game to play as it comes down to using your own dscanning skills or coordinating with others placed elsewhere to get a lead on a ships potential location. A fun game of cat-and-mouse if you've ever tried to hunt someone who is actively avoiding being scanned down.

With that in mind, combat probing can offer much fun in the way of maneuver-gaming and fleet posturing. However, the most essential part of the game is a bit difficult to work with. The massive CPU requirements make it a very difficult option to use. This typically means a ship is solely dedicated to that purpose, as trying to fit it anything close to normal combat load outs is almost impossible. It's not a simple switching of a nano for a co-processor or downgrading to compact modules, it often means the best or only option is to remove significant modules (usually guns) in order to use it.

Ironically enough, there are only two classes of ship with fitting bonuses that allow the probe launcher to have similar fitting consequences as a normal module: T3 destroyers and cruisers, both of which have MASSIVE CPU reduction bonuses. Not even covert ops ships or SOE ships have fitting bonuses, while sporting probe-strength bonuses (presumably those bonuses are intended for Core probes as apprised to combat probes).

The point: What I propose is allowing a method or changing stats so that Expanded probe launchers can be fit properly on more ships.

There are multiple possible methods of doing this, each with its own benefits and trade-offs.

First I'll go over a point that will somewhat keep the idea in check, so to ensure it does not fling the mets in the opposite direction where probe launchers are too easy to fit.

The main consideration we need to evaluate is what ships do we think should not have easy access to probing capabilities. First things that come to mind for me are interceptors and interdictors/hictors. Why? Wouldn't these ships benefit the most from a change such as this? Yes, I believe they would, however I believe that pairing fast-tackle-specialized ships with the probing would synergies too much. It would be like having a Formula 1 car in the Kentucky derby, then strapping a rocket to it too. There are a few other ships that may have strong arguments for keeping their probing options limited as well. With that note, some of my ideas will err on the side of caution in terms of who gets what. For the most part, I will make suggestions on the premise that smaller ships should have more difficulty and larger ships less, preferably finding a balance that centers on Cruisers or Battlecruisers.

THE MEAT
Now that my monotonous driveling is out of the way, what are the possible methods?

Option #1:
- Reduce CPU cost and/or increase PG demand
This is the simplest method, however it is also the most touchy and likely to have difficulty in finding its proper balance. I'm no fitting expert, but for the sake of argument, I'll propose a reduction down to 75 CPU as the base, increase PG to 50. This still makes probes a tough fitting option for smaller ships, but allows bigger ships plenty of fidelity to choose how to squeeze it in. Obviously if someone has a better suggestion substitute your own numbers.

Option #2:
- Ship/class-specific fitting bonuses
Similar to existing T3 bonuses. This allows full control over which ships get less restriction and by how much. If I were to suggest some classes that would fill this role nicely: Recons (combat and force), Command ships, Battlecruisers, and Covert ops off the top of my head. Each ship in those classes has a role or partial role that would justify their place. Most of those classes also have some sort of drawback or issue that prevents them from falling under the fast-tackle category (upon exiting a warp). Now, while they do not fall under the same categories as those above, I personally would like to suggest adding a similar bonus to assault frigates. While it contradicts my earlier statement to avoid giving tackle ships probing capabilities, I think it might be possible to make an exception, and ever so slightly bring AF closer in use to T3Ds. Just a little personal wish though.

Option #3:
- Rigs
Pretty simple and has a similar principle to option 2. A rig that would reduce the cost of fittin expanded probe launchers. Depending on the rig's calibration cost, it also presents an interesting fitting challenge. One possibility to consider is the restriction to certain sizes of rigs, just like how certain mining rigs (can't recall off the top of my head) are only available in medium size, leaving mining frigates out of the equation. Rigs also allow drawbacks which could reduce the effectiveness of probing or other ship aspects, to properly trade new capability with a new handicap.

TL;DR 2.0:
Expanded probe launcher fittings are too restrictive. Allow easier fitting on more ships. Refer to options 1,2, and 3 for specifics.

I would personally go with the class of ship that make sense to be probers and give them a role bonus to it's fitting. Recon of both type, cover ops frigate (not bomber even if they share the hull skill), T3 on the scanning sub system, command ship. Up for debate would be command destroyer and t1 scanning frigates.