Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Firstly, rig slots aren't worth as much as highs, mids, and lows for the most part. In fact they're worth so much less that I think simply being allowed to slide your slots around without gaining any overall is worth giving up rig slots to do. I could accept a tech 2 rig moving 2 slots. They're so expensive anyway, and cost more calibration too.

After some thought, I think maybe it'd be alright to change a mid or low slot out to get another highslot. Highslots are very useful, but you also have to realize the really cool items you put in these cost a lot of either powergrid or CPU generally. The exception to this might be capital ships and cloaking devices, and maybe a few other instances with cloaks. To be fair, I think capital ships should be required to fit a capital cloaking device to cloak anyway.

I like the idea.

However, consider this.

Rigs

Allowing for the addition of more slots causes a bit of an imbalance.
So, how about this.

Instead of rigs adding slots, they instead recalibrate slots to be used in a different sector.

So, the rigs would be

high to mid
high to low
mid to high
mid to low
low to high
low to mid

They would simply be called Re-allocation rigs.

CANNOT fit rigs removing from the same slot.

So you can't pull 2 highs, and put them in mid or low.
Same for mids and lows
However, you can pull a high to a mid and a low to a mid, or whatever combination.

However, a t2 would be capable of pulling 2 slots to any position, however, you would only be able to fit one t2 of any type.

t1 rigs would be 150 calibration
t2 would be 250 calibration

This would mean that a t1 ship with 400 calibration points would be capable of fitting two t1's, and would have 100 calibration left. A t2 would allow 150 points left for 2 more rigs, which might limit what it could fit, but but not in a crippling manner.

T1's in my mind would be good for ships like the raven, which could drop a high and low in order to fit more mids for pve, or possibly more utility in pvp.

t2 would be good for ships like the Golem in pve to drop high slots for those of us that don't salvage in order to fit more mids for tank/utility, and would be good for ships the the rattlesnake to drop highs for more utility mids in pvp.

These rigs could possibly help to allow more ships to be seen in pvp that typically have limited use due to low utility or a generally bad slot layout...

That said though, if CCP balances most of the ships well enough, then we won't really need anything to reallocate slots.

lol most T1 battleships can manage with T2 fits...no warp outs. u probably are doing something wrong. if u need a fit, drop me a mail

brillient idea

this basically. Not even gonna hit the high slot/mount point Stuff. IMO its not the highs that imba ships in a heart beat. Imo, its the mids and lows. 8 gun BS of doom is limited by its support low/mid mods. Want the deeps, tank is taking the hit at the most basic level for armour tankers. LR snipe has sebo killing something to target at range (rokh/naga this would be tank for example).

I know where this idea is going....the caveat of no more hard points given so easily makes its clear. Its going to jsut one more gyro/mag stab/heat sink. Or one more plate/resist. thats where the imba comes in. Want one more heat sink...pull a plate. Vice this happening and now you get gank boats that actually tank well.

What if you needed to burn 2 rig slots to relocate one slot? Say you have two new rig sets:

Slot Delete and Slot Reallocate

Your Delete Rig can be a Mid or Low Delete and your Reallocate Rig can be for either a Mid or a Low. Deny High Slot involvement entirely.

a nice nerf to the idea, but we are still talking about ridiculous e-war ships. last i heard the falcon was overpowered with 7 mids...giving it 8 will cause squirrels to cry tears of blood

edit-also thinking about it more, taking two rigs is probably unecessary. just give it ridiculous calibration costs for the same effect

yes!