These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread

First post First post
Author
CCP RedDawn
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2016-04-25 11:43:13 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP RedDawn
Hi all.

After releasing some information regarding this during Fanfest, I'd like to get your feedback on two new Storyline exploration modules.

I propose to release two new mid slot 'hacking' modules, that can open both Data and Relic containers.
This would free up a mid slot for all explorers who wish to use these modules, rather then having to fit both the Data and Relic Analyzers separately.
However as these modules would combine two separate 'functions' together, they will be less effective generally than their individual, specialised counterparts.

The BPC's for these modules would drop from all Data exploration sites.
The ‘Ligature’ Integrated Analyzer BPC would drop from the lower end Info Shard and Com Tower containers, while the ‘Zeugma’ Integrated Analyzer BPC would drop from the higher end Mainframe and Databank containers.


Now on to the stats.

‘Ligature’ Integrated Analyzer

Volume 5 m3
Activation Cost 20 GJ
Optimal Range 5000 m
Activation Time / Duration 10 seconds
Virus Coherence 20
Virus Strength 20
Virus Utility Element Slots 1
Tech Level 1
CPU usage 25


‘Zeugma’ Integrated Analyzer

Volume 5 m3
Activation Cost 20 GJ
Optimal Range 6000 m
Activation Time / Duration 10 seconds
Virus Coherence 40
Virus Strength 30
Virus Utility Element Slots 1
Tech Level 2
CPU usage 30



To manufacture these modules, you will require the following:


‘Ligature’ Integrated Analyzer

Relic Analyzer I x1
Data Analyzer I x1
High-Tech Data Chip x500
High-Tech Manufacturing Tools x500
High-Tech Scanner x500


‘Zeugma’ Integrated Analyzer

Relic Analyzer II x1
Data Analyzer II x1
High-Tech Data Chip x1000
High-Tech Manufacturing Tools x1000
High-Tech Scanner x1000

You will also require both of the same Data and Relic skills that the Tech I and Tech II current analyzers use.

That's it for now, please share your thoughts, ideas and concerns.

Fly safe, (and thanks for an awesome Fanfest yet again) Big smile
CCP RedDawn

EDIT: Increased both Strengths to the same values as their Tech I and II variants.
Lower Coherence, 2 less Utility Element Slots and higher CPU requirement still remain.

Team Genesis

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#2 - 2016-04-25 11:52:52 UTC
Not a bad idea, I think. Especially considering that some people swap them around with a mobile depot, so the end fit wouldn't be that different, just more cargo space (Not entirely sure how common this is. I just have anecdotal data on it. May be worth checking Eve Metrics, or bugging Quant.)


For people wanting to compare: They're 10 weaker coherence than the T1/T2 versions, 5 weaker on strength, and take 5 more cpu. and have one less slot to store things you find (like the coherence improver thing)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#3 - 2016-04-25 11:55:30 UTC
While I can see the benefits of having one mod to rule them all, they look very expensive.

The idea isn't bad but I would still stick to my 2 tech 2 mods on my Astero / Stratios for the task at hand. Now if the mods would have a tad more range to warrant the price, that would be a different story.

Say 7000m for the t1 and 8000m for the t2.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Dr Zemph
Doomheim
#4 - 2016-04-25 11:56:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Dr Zemph
Why not a scriptable analyzer instead? Something like the current sensor booster where you have one module that could hack both moderately well, or you can script it to hack either a data or a relic can really well.

Edit: I mis-read the volume stat above. That one's on me...
Canenald
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#5 - 2016-04-25 11:56:56 UTC
I don't think this will be used a lot. The hacking minigame is already random and fatal enough (for the loot at least) that you'll want to max out your virus strength as much as possible. There's in general two kinds of explorers I've encountered so far:

1) Focusing only on relic sites for the best loot. They don't give a **** about integrated analyzers because they only do relic sites.

2) Doing both. If I can't find a good relic site at least I'll get decent loot from those 10 data sites. We usually don't need the extra mid.

The one use where I can see it as useful is for newbro explorers who need that scan strength more than virus strength, so they can free up a mid and put an array in it. I don't see this happening much if the storyline modules remain expensive.
Carbon Alabel
Gemini Talon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#6 - 2016-04-25 11:59:30 UTC
I like the idea, but don't see myself using them as I don't consider the extra mid slot to be worth the significant decrease in virus strength.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#7 - 2016-04-25 12:00:28 UTC
Dr Zemph wrote:
Why not a scriptable analyzer instead? Something like the current sensor booster where you have one module that could hack both moderately well, or you can script it to hack either a data or a relic can really well.

I like the idea of one module that does both, but not one that takes up twice the space. There are some exploration ships that suffer from a small amount of mid slots and I don't see the added benefit of taking two mids to achieve one task



Uh, it doesn't take up twice the space? It's taking up half the space, as you only need to have one fitted? That's the entire point?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Noene Drops
Deep Chain Diving
#8 - 2016-04-25 12:00:46 UTC
The idea sounds good, however there's one popular use case for hacking skills: having Archaeology V but Hacking IV. Of course ghost sites encourage training Hacking to V too, but is there any chance of "T2" version of these modules to change its stats based on what level of hacking skills you have? Maybe this could be achieved by using different versions of scripts for integrated analyzers.
Aiken Paru
Anoikis Nomads
#9 - 2016-04-25 12:04:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Aiken Paru
‘Zeugma’ Integrated Analyzer

- virus strength of a T1 analyzer
- coherence between T1 and T2
- only 2 instead of 3 utility slots
- 5 more CPU compared to a single T2, 25 less than both modules

Hmmm... most exploration ships -- including some Interceptors -- have no issue fitting both analyzers.

I can't help feeling that these modules try to fill a niche that in reality isn't there.

With the reduced coherence/strength compared to a T2 module this new module is pretty much out of question for Interceptors. Those exploration hulls who don't have enough midslots for both 'traditional' analyzers have enough cargo for a mobile depot.

Personally I don't see the little bit of convenience that the Zeugma adds being worth the downsides. Less CPU is nice but exploration ships generally aren't very tight on CPU to begin with unless fitted with Expanded Probe Launchers.

Edited for clarity:

How about
- single scriptable module
- coherence and strength on par with existing T2 modules
- 2 utility slots
- between 60 or 70 CPU requirement to not be OP
end edit


‘Ligature’ Integrated Analyzer is so weak compared to a T1 I see no use whatsoever.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#10 - 2016-04-25 12:04:22 UTC
Noene Drops wrote:
The idea sounds good, however there's one popular use case for hacking skills: having Archaeology V but Hacking IV. Of course ghost sites encourage training Hacking to V too, but is there any chance of "T2" version of these modules to change its stats based on what level of hacking skills you have? Maybe this could be achieved by using different versions of scripts for integrated analyzers.



Your skills do affect them?

Archaeology adds 10 to virus coherence per level (for relic analyzers), and hacking does the same for data analyzers)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Canenald
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#11 - 2016-04-25 12:04:59 UTC
Makes no sense to make it scripted. Scripts make sense in a fight were you have to wait for the cycle to finish then click through the script change. Out of combat, when there's no pressure, you might as well let it do both things well without scripts, but I'm strongly against that. Specialized analyzers give us choice, and eve is fun because of all the choices you have to make.
Dr Zemph
Doomheim
#12 - 2016-04-25 12:06:11 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Dr Zemph wrote:
Why not a scriptable analyzer instead? Something like the current sensor booster where you have one module that could hack both moderately well, or you can script it to hack either a data or a relic can really well.

I like the idea of one module that does both, but not one that takes up twice the space. There are some exploration ships that suffer from a small amount of mid slots and I don't see the added benefit of taking two mids to achieve one task



Uh, it doesn't take up twice the space? It's taking up half the space, as you only need to have one fitted? That's the entire point?


Ah, damn, good catch. Guess I mis-read the volume.

Still think scripting is a better way to go though, in my humble opinion
Scotsman Howard
S0utherN Comfort
#13 - 2016-04-25 12:19:25 UTC
I applaud the idea, but I do not see it being used to much. Ignoring the price, if I am going exploring, I am going to max out on the virus strength. As an explorer, the loss of a mid is acceptable because I am not setup primarily for combat. Yes, you can fight, but you fit the ship for a job.

Now, if these had the same virus strength, then I would actually use it, but if I am going to be flying an astero or cov ops around, I would lose the mid for max effeciency.
Noene Drops
Deep Chain Diving
#14 - 2016-04-25 12:29:31 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Noene Drops wrote:
The idea sounds good, however there's one popular use case for hacking skills: having Archaeology V but Hacking IV. Of course ghost sites encourage training Hacking to V too, but is there any chance of "T2" version of these modules to change its stats based on what level of hacking skills you have? Maybe this could be achieved by using different versions of scripts for integrated analyzers.



Your skills do affect them?

Archaeology adds 10 to virus coherence per level (for relic analyzers), and hacking does the same for data analyzers)


Apologize if I made it unclear but I was addressing the requirements:

Quote:
You will also require both of the same Data and Relic skills that the Tech I and Tech II current analyzers use.


The way I understand it, I won't be able to use "T2" module if I have one of the hacking skills not at V. So I suggested that scripts could solve that. The modules themselves could differ by base stats and initial bonuses to hacking.
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
Coalition of the Unfortunate
#15 - 2016-04-25 12:56:06 UTC
Considering every explorer I know carries a mobile depot in their hold to change things around, I don't see why not... warping off, deploying a depot, changing your modules, scooping and warping back, is not fun gameplay... so a single module would work fine.
Savant Alabel
Phoenix Tag.
GF Company
#16 - 2016-04-25 13:09:59 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Not a bad idea, I think. Especially considering that some people swap them around with a mobile depot, so the end fit wouldn't be that different, just more cargo space (Not entirely sure how common this is. I just have anecdotal data on it. May be worth checking Eve Metrics, or bugging Quant.)


For people wanting to compare: They're 10 weaker coherence than the T1/T2 versions, 5 weaker on strength, and take 5 more cpu. and have one less slot to store things you find (like the coherence improver thing)



Some people refit with depot, but most of other just skip datasites.
Lavayar
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2016-04-25 13:26:13 UTC
How about adding scripts to this new module to make them as efficient as specialised modules?
Jean-Jaques Keikira
Perkone
Caldari State
#18 - 2016-04-25 13:26:56 UTC
It's somewhat counter-intuitive to the typical meta. A weaker module is going to be useful only in weaker sites (high-sec), meaning there is less potential risk that would need to be mitigated with an extra mid (tank, ecm, etc). If I'm hacking in null or a WH, I really don't want to risk losing cans, so the most powerful Data/Relic Analyzer is worth the extra slot or time in a Mobile Depot. I would never use it in a Sleeper Cache or Ghost Site where my ship is on the line while hacking.

I suppose it would allow for more use of the Scanning modules (Pinpointing, Rangefinding, etc), because three of them are usually contending for 1-2 slots. But then again, if you need the scanning boost, you probably need the virus bonuses more. That being said, there's really no downside to more exploration modules. I'm sure somebody will find a use for it somewhere. It's just filling a niche that is limited to non-existent right now.

I would say that re-balancing Data Sites and adding more interactive sites like the Sleeper Caches would be far higher on most explorer's radar than new modules. Many people just skip Data Sites (and the Analyzer) entirely now because Relics are so much more lucrative.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#19 - 2016-04-25 13:44:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
The idea is interesting, but the modules are way too expensive for the low stats, which make them useless compared to the specialized modules.

Why add a new module that combines both but is worse when you can just remove both modules and add 1 new module that is as good as the former specialized ones? Wasn't Fozzie happy about the removal of the module clutter that the old ECCM modules were, and now you add new clutter?

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.

Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#20 - 2016-04-25 13:48:25 UTC
Max virus strength is too important to consider using these.

But don't throw this idea out (it's not a terrible idea in principle like the daily chore idea; it's just an unrefined one).

These are an example of something that could be balanced by rarity. Mirror the T2 stats, but aim for a high price tag, perhaps in the 800-1100m range.

Gives people an option to risk more exploring for faster sites and will lead to hilarious killmails.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

123Next pageLast page