These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Mechanical Rigs
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Korrimal Ohmiras
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-09-26 16:25:07 UTC
New Classification of Rigging - Mechanical Rigs

1) Calibration Monitor: A new rig that would allow for an increase the amount of available calibration that can be used by 50 pts

2) A new set of rig type that would provide for an extra high slot (150 calibration), mid slot (100 calibration), or low slot (50 calibration) up to the maximum available and unused. This could be further segmented:


  • Turret Hard-point (high-slot)
  • Launcher Hard-point (high-slot)
  • Shield Hard-point (mid-slot)
  • Armor Hard-point (mid-slot)
  • Engineering Hard-point (mid-slot)
  • Hull Hard-point (low-slot)
  • Electronic Hard-point (low-slot)


Drawback on all of these would be signature radius (increase the size of the ship, then obviously its a bigger target)

So something along these lines. The thought being that people can then opt to do things like add a couple of extra slots at the expense of something like an extra defense field purger or such.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2 - 2013-09-26 16:52:30 UTC
No again. This would seriously skew ship balance.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Icarus Able
Refuse.Resist
#3 - 2013-09-26 17:00:20 UTC
Ok disregarding that this would be an awful idea. Why have you got Armor as a mid slot?
Korrimal Ohmiras
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-09-26 17:17:05 UTC
No specific reason - just easier for people to think of better names when you have a couple of suggestions (good or bad) to go from.

And yes the whole point is to allow greater variability in ship configurations. I don't see that as unbalancing things as you still have to give up rig slots that would normally bonus other aspects of the ship, plus I'm not suggesting that the new rigging types increase or decrease CPU and power. So you still need to fit everything within the existing boundaries set-out for each ship.



Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#5 - 2013-09-26 17:23:44 UTC
Korrimal Ohmiras wrote:
And yes the whole point is to allow greater variability in ship configurations. I don't see that as unbalancing things as you still have to give up rig slots that would normally bonus other aspects of the ship, plus I'm not suggesting that the new rigging types increase or decrease CPU and power.


So what happens to ships with 8 existing high slots and weapons?

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Korrimal Ohmiras
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-09-27 00:40:04 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
So what happens to ships with 8 existing high slots and weapons?


Nothing - if 8 is the max then that is the max. That way nothing has to be redesigned to allow for more slots in terms of graphics, layout, etc..
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#7 - 2013-09-27 01:06:45 UTC
Korrimal Ohmiras wrote:
No specific reason - just easier for people to think of better names when you have a couple of suggestions (good or bad) to go from.

And yes the whole point is to allow greater variability in ship configurations. I don't see that as unbalancing things as you still have to give up rig slots that would normally bonus other aspects of the ship, plus I'm not suggesting that the new rigging types increase or decrease CPU and power. So you still need to fit everything within the existing boundaries set-out for each ship.






Example of imba.....resists.

On my shield tankers I get limited slots to run resists after all the stuff like prop mods and such go on. It is common for me on caldari ships to run say invul + thermal hards and em resist rig (or flip to thermal rig and run em hard). thats my basic resist setup for pvp.


I take your new rig to make a new mid slot. I get better resists. Look at resist value of rig versus hards. rigs are lower boosts. Since I already write off 1 rig slot for a resist I lose nothing (as I almost always run 1 resist rig as SOP now) and gain alot with much better resists now with a mid slot hardener I did not have before.

Your sig radius penalty is also not much of a downside. At the BS and above classes level unless in a mach most have given up the idea of sig tanking. This also arguable at BC level.

I will also be nit picky and point out using the above issue of rig to mid slot resist if I pulled an em rig on my drake to make it an em hardener I break even. I already had the em rig's sig radius boost to start off with, I jsut swtich radius penalties with this change. If I throw on lse and cdfe for passive drake I am already a fat ass target...what's a few more meters of radius if you counter well make the rig be really big radius.