These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Increase the PG requirements of afterburners

Author
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#1 - 2016-08-22 13:59:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Caleb Seremshur
I play on SISI a lot. No other place do I see such a diverse range of ships and fits on display but there is one thing that really REALLY causes my brow to frown. This the concept of the oversized afterburner. The ships which can fit them tend to be able to run them without completely breaking their fits - they can fit a full rack of guns and a modest tank while maintaining the benefits of the extra mass and speed. We're not necessarily talking about reaching MWD speeds, we're talking about reaching 2 or 3x the speed of an appropriately sized AB and not having any proper way to shut these off on conventional fits which struggle to fit all their guns and tank without one fitting module/rig/implant - the way Rise himself said it was intended to be.

At least I'd like to experience a version of the game that doesn't allow oversized AB to be used at all. There's a reason why the modding scene is so massive, why people customise the experience to suit their preferences. This extends to MMOs now as well with some games like runescape and WoW having alternative servers that run customised code so that people can play the game in a certain way, including but not limited to finally fixing broken abilities, weapons or classes that the developers refuse to fix (because according to Blizzard, being OP or being the underdog with hardcoded performance statistics to back it up is a thing).

I would really like to see;

1. The 10mn AB become 125 pg.
2. The 100mn AB become 1250 pg.

I feel like these simple things would fix many of the issues with b.s. fits that can power around the grid. People tell me these fits are hyper-specialised well I don't believe that's true. I don't have the analytics tools to scan every single lossmail out there to see how many of them there are. It would be an oxymoron to use a killboard to check that anyway, since the whole point is that the problem is those oversized AB fits which don't die, not the ones which do. I think that ships gaining unusually high speeds from AB should be those ships with native bonsues to them, like the succubus/etc. I think that we already have a precedent in place for allowing some forms of ship fitting which make things perform in very unusual ways. I think that many of the problems people complained about with regards the svipul originally stemmed from its ability to fit a 10mn AB and a full complement of tank&spank and that the lowest common denominator with complaints which center around fits abusing oversized props are the oversized props - go figure.

I'd love to see the rationalisation from the status-quo camp on why oversized-AB should remain so easy to fit. I've been around long enough to have seen just about all the debates on this topic, I've seen the dev team come out and state that they "don't want the option of oversized prop mods to disappear". I don't think they should disappear either, I just don't think you should reasonably expect to have 30k ehp and do 300dps while you do it. You want to talk about hyper-specialisation but refuse to acknowledge that these are actually kind of common especially when talking about confessors, some stabber configurations, the tengu and various frigates. I'm actually kind of suprised the capital AB can't be fit to battleships, maybe possibly something like the abaddon actually can who even knows? [edit] yes it can, with a single RCU it can fit a 10,000MN AB. Or rather it ~could~, if they weren't class limited to capitals only. Seriously CCP some consistency please, surely if oversized AB on battleship is broken why would you permit it on other classes?
afk phone
Repo Industries
#2 - 2016-08-22 14:07:46 UTC
The same should be done with plates and shield extenders also. These ridiculous oversized plate/extender fits allow many ships (with logi support) to be virtually invincible.


elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#3 - 2016-08-22 14:20:17 UTC
Wrong tool for the job.

Just increase powergrid requirements of magic neutralizers by 100x too and we are good to go.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#4 - 2016-08-22 17:36:16 UTC
...you realise this would break the entirely conventional fits of an awful lot of ships, right?

Is the 125/1250 figure for T1, T2 or compact?
Zoltan Lazar
#5 - 2016-08-22 17:56:55 UTC
This breaks the MWD/AB fitting balance and ruins a lot of proper sized fits.

I think a better nerf would be to further tweak how mass/inertia works with ABs so their benefit (both top speed and align) is even worse.
SurrenderMonkey
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2016-08-22 18:22:16 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I don't have the analytics tools


Guess we'll just go with your gut feeling, then. **** data. CCP, make it so!

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#7 - 2016-08-22 18:26:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I don't have the analytics tools


Guess we'll just go with your gut feeling, then. **** data. CCP, make it so!

Hmmm yeah, he seems to know what hes talking about, certainly used a lot of words.
...
Im convinced, to whom do I send my isk?
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#8 - 2016-08-22 22:57:27 UTC
Im somewhat in agreement, however, as far as i have seen, there aren't loads of ships using oversized ab's. Could we fix the issue by nerfing the grid of these particular ships or some combination of the two?

I think 125grid for 10mn ab's is too much. Putting it at 70-80 grid will be tough for dessies and frigs to build a fit around. And the cruisers that fit large ab's could just have their grid nerfed.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#9 - 2016-08-22 23:44:29 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Im somewhat in agreement, however, as far as i have seen, there aren't loads of ships using oversized ab's. Could we fix the issue by nerfing the grid of these particular ships or some combination of the two?

I think 125grid for 10mn ab's is too much. Putting it at 70-80 grid will be tough for dessies and frigs to build a fit around. And the cruisers that fit large ab's could just have their grid nerfed.


Scuse me but they those chasing an oversized ab fit boat and only fit short range guns, they aren't doing it right, so the game doesn't have to be changed to work for them.

If some folks cannot fathom fitting long range guns it's not the game's fault.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#10 - 2016-08-23 00:30:49 UTC
There's more to it than that. Using an oversized ab makes you difficult to apply damage to. Especially with missiles.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#11 - 2016-08-23 00:52:29 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
There's more to it than that. Using an oversized ab makes you difficult to apply damage to. Especially with missiles.


Damn, right!

I forgot about those. I tried to reason for medium long range missiles and failed but I tried.

When the Confessor hit SiSi and people figured out they could be with with a 10mn ab I was flying an Apocalypse, waiting for the skill to finish and had one approach me.

Even though he may have been in defense mode, he had a really bad day. An Eagle with railguns will probably do the same.

Maybe it's just me but they will have incredible bad turning speeds and will warp or have a bad day too.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#12 - 2016-08-23 01:14:49 UTC
I'd be much more in favor of making propulsion and tanking modules class-size specific, but then everyone whines "you are taking all the creativity out of Eve."

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

Roenok Baalnorn
Baalnorn Heavy Industries
#13 - 2016-08-23 04:17:15 UTC
Or when you are fighting such builds, just bring the right tools for the job. I dont agree with this suggestion but IF you were to fix this "problem" the simple and best way to do it is to make Prop mods class spec. Or at least have a min size class they can be fitted to. IE: 10MN can only be fitted to cruisers and larger, wheras 1MN can be fitted to any ship, and 100 MN can only be fitted to BS and larger.

Its a simple solution that doesnt nerf a bunch of fits and ships to achieve one thing.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#14 - 2016-08-23 07:19:07 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
...you realise this would break the entirely conventional fits of an awful lot of ships, right?

Is the 125/1250 figure for T1, T2 or compact?


The figure I suggest was pulled out of a hat - CCP would adjust the PG of the ships that fit these things the same way they did with naglfar, avatar, worm, gila I'm sure the list goes on..

Quote:
Guess we'll just go with your gut feeling, then. **** data. CCP, make it so!


Ha! Contextless quote! You completely neglected to include this part: " It would be an oxymoron to use a killboard to check that anyway, since the whole point is that the problem is those oversized AB fits which don't die"

Hey bro, let's just sit down and think about this for 5 seconds alright. You can't scan lossmails for ships that aren't dead.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#15 - 2016-08-23 07:26:09 UTC
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
Or when you are fighting such builds, just bring the right tools for the job.


Yeah well, this sort of thinking is the kind of **** that requires me to have ESP and telepathically know what my opponent has undocked before I fight him. Suppose I only find out after we're already on grid/engaged to one another? You see you can zoom in on an opponent and see if he has arty/AC, you can see if he's shield tanked or armour tanked (most of the time if talking about active modules) but you can't see his prop. I mean we are basically talking about strapping a 6L v8 in to a VW beetle. Yeah...? Wouldn't bonnet modifications to fit the damn thing be a dead giveaway?

As for class limited AB like with the capital sizes yes I already mentioned that, it is the quick fix however I don't want oversized props to disappear entirely I just want them to be what they are; ships modified in extreme ways to fit a powersource they otherwise couldn't and if that means 4 fitting mods and 2 cap injectors then so be it.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#16 - 2016-08-23 08:41:33 UTC
The second we get fighter max speed reduced to 700m/s all gun tracking increased by 10x, go nuts.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Wimzy Chent-Shi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2016-08-23 08:53:57 UTC
It's a good thought for balancing. Lots of ships get away with it while lots of others struggle with normal fitting. Struggle is real. I think the suggested fixes so far are inadequate but can not produce a valid solution myself. I can only agree that this can be an issue.
Maybe make the extra thrust/tonnage further punishing?

Come get some cancer @ my blog !

"This clash of opinions is like cutting onions. We are creating something here, that's productive, ...and then there is also salt." -Wimzy 2016

Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#18 - 2016-08-23 09:06:59 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
The second we get fighter max speed reduced to 700m/s all gun tracking increased by 10x, go nuts.


I really don't think carriers are that much of a problem. fyt me.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#19 - 2016-08-23 12:47:51 UTC
You have not convinced me that this is a problem that needs to be fixed so -1.

But going in the spirit and accepting that it is broken this sledge hammer approach is a terrible idea. I have many ships / fits that use appropriate sizes AB and none of them would be possible because power grid if CCP did this. However there is a very simple way to solve this and the best part of the idea is that it does not affect any fit in existence that uses "proper" sized AB or MWD. Simply define them as small, medium, large etc and make them like turrets and launchers in that you can always fit smaller but you cannot fit larger, there problem solved and no changes to PG needed.
Roenok Baalnorn
Baalnorn Heavy Industries
#20 - 2016-08-23 13:49:20 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:
Or when you are fighting such builds, just bring the right tools for the job.


Yeah well, this sort of thinking is the kind of **** that requires me to have ESP and telepathically know what my opponent has undocked before I fight him. Suppose I only find out after we're already on grid/engaged to one another? You see you can zoom in on an opponent and see if he has arty/AC, you can see if he's shield tanked or armour tanked (most of the time if talking about active modules) but you can't see his prop. I mean we are basically talking about strapping a 6L v8 in to a VW beetle. Yeah...? Wouldn't bonnet modifications to fit the damn thing be a dead giveaway?

As for class limited AB like with the capital sizes yes I already mentioned that, it is the quick fix however I don't want oversized props to disappear entirely I just want them to be what they are; ships modified in extreme ways to fit a powersource they otherwise couldn't and if that means 4 fitting mods and 2 cap injectors then so be it.


You will never know what he has fitted. You cant see if he has a scram or disruptor, if he was one or two webs. If any of those are faction or deadspace. If he is armor or shield tanked( you can make an educated guess based on ship type but thats it), If he is all spank and no tank all tank and no spank. You dont know how many tracking mods he has. So he may have the range of an arty and the tracking of ACs. There is a lot of unknowns.

Builds with oversized mods are crap at turning though. Its like trying to turn an aircraft carrier at 80 knots. They are trading a lower sig radius for less agility. They cant orbit at close range with an oversized AB and still maintain max speed, so short range weapons are unlikely unless they attempt to strafe. If they straight on strafe you should be able to hit them. Spiraling will be hard because the ship lacks maneuverability.

If you are in the same size ship or smaller you can catch them with an MWD. You will have better agility and better speed. If you are in a larger gunship , you can turn your ship to help make up for their traversal and use drones. If you are in a bigger missile ship, you can use a variety of ewar.

Its just silly to break a bunch of ships and fits to fix one problem that can be fixed by bringing the right tool for the job. Your not going to be able to counter everything all the time. At best the modules should be limited to class specific. No need to change PGs of ABs and make them useless for most builds.
12Next page