These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Remove/Limit Oversized Prop Mods

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Janeway84
Insane's Asylum
#21 - 2015-03-31 08:55:18 UTC
this is horrible, its like demanding that only vanilla ice cream is going to be the only option?
What if i want sweets and chocolate sauce on mine? Pirate

-1 for limiting the sandbox
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2015-03-31 08:59:53 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Well over 300 with beams, room for web & AAR on top of >5k ehp which given the damage mitigation is a lot.

Same with pulses if you're so inclined but more damage and better tanking.



Ed: the caldari one will be the worst offender though, it's going to be stupid.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#23 - 2015-03-31 09:55:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Here's my 2 cents after seeing some replies here:

Yes, there are big drawbacks to fitting oversized ab, especially in regards to pg and agility. The issue is specifically sig radius vs speed though. Part of the reason a sig bloom bonus EXISTS on the mwd is specifically to offset the MASSIVE bonuses speed and mobility give you on the battlefield by increasing your sig radius to allow you to actually be hit by something. Pretty basic stuff.

However, despite the drawbacks to fitting oversized ab, people do it, and do it quite handily to game the system. You don't have ANY penalties with sig and your capacitor is comparably manageable, which makes any ship that uses them not only hard to hit, but nearly impossible to hold down since there's nothing that turns the prop mod off, only slows it down.

Getting multiple webs on a target is the only viable option apart from having a few decent snipers on field, and unless you've got the right equipment on field, you're not pinning down that destroyer or 100mn phantasm that blazes space tracks at over 4km/s. Sure it's fun, but it's a VERY low-risk and frankly obnoxious way to play since it's basically thumbing its nose at the few and far between options for countering the kite meta.

So yeah, lock them into it. It'll mean that you can get the AB and MWD you would normally be able to fit have room to be balanced properly, and not fear the current ones getting the nerf hammer due to this ONE particular exploit. It won't be the end of the world considering how much this problem is confined to destroyers and Sansha ships, and I believe most of us would feel a lot better off with a nerf like this instead of having to make blood sacrifices in small gang to the D3 gods, or see them and other ships that exploit this particular mechanic nerfed into the ground to compensate.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2015-03-31 09:59:06 UTC
100mn phantasm turns like an oil tanker though.

The problem is definitely specific to hulls, let's not toss the baby out with the bathwater.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#25 - 2015-03-31 10:06:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
afkalt wrote:
100mn phantasm turns like an oil tanker though.

The problem is definitely specific to hulls, let's not toss the baby out with the bathwater.

My point exactly. Any future balance or nerf that'll come around as a result of this abuse will end up hurting the ships themselves, and continue to refuse to address the issue. What I'm TRYING to do is present an option, albeit a hard one to swallow, that negates that from ever happening.

While d3s need a nerf, t1 dessies sure as hell don't. Removing 10mn from the equation from them would likely help out quite a bit towards keeping them from marginalizing other frigates and destroyers as dramatically as they have.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#26 - 2015-03-31 10:08:23 UTC
Janeway84 wrote:
this is horrible, its like demanding that only vanilla ice cream is going to be the only option?
What if i want sweets and chocolate sauce on mine? Pirate

-1 for limiting the sandbox

Would you have made the same argument back in the days of multiple prop mod activation? Machs screaming along at 40km/s is a posterchild of broken game mechanics, but the same type of BS has existed with oversized AB; it just hasn't come up to the surface as much until the pirate faction ship rebal and the introduction of d3s.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#27 - 2015-03-31 10:15:20 UTC
Ok, here's an alternate proposal to outright banning them from size usage...why not simply double the powergrid usage of 10m and 100mn afterburners? They'd be easier to fit than mwd, and it'd solve the problem with them being exploited on ships smaller than their intended fitting.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#28 - 2015-03-31 10:30:45 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Ok, here's an alternate proposal to outright banning them from size usage...why not simply double the powergrid usage of 10m and 100mn afterburners? They'd be easier to fit than mwd, and it'd solve the problem with them being exploited on ships smaller than their intended fitting.


but now you are hurting cruiser and BS fits some of which cut it close with less than 1PG left over as is


afkalt wrote:


Ed: the caldari one will be the worst offender though, it's going to be stupid.




how so we don't know the PG/CPU of it and we do know it will be the slowest



if anything it will be the gal one if it can fit a 10mn since the gal will not only have sig to mitigate but also over 79% resists in hull across the board

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2015-03-31 10:53:54 UTC
Missiles being able to ignore your own speeds and relative movement is the problem. Or will be. Almost anything small can go so fast it can't track or be tracked - except missile hulls and the existing ones aren't that DPSy
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2015-03-31 12:56:24 UTC
Lienzo wrote:
[quote=Tusker Crazinski]
One appropriate drawback for PG rigs should be increased PG requirements of all highslot weapon modules, and likewise for CPU modules, or decreases in other ship stats such as capacitor, regeneration, or require a trade of stats. If included with stacking penalties, one could ameliorate the severity of impact of the other.


ahh pointing out the ONLY way to fit arty to any minmatar ship requires 1-2 ACRs.... some can't do it with 3. this would literally delete howitzers. I mean yeah RCUs work, however they leave you with no CPU.
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2015-03-31 13:10:13 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
there are ships that may need to lose the ability to fit over sized mods yes or perhaps penalize them for using however simply saying that they cant just limits the sandbox


Limiting the sandbox is sometimes necessary, unfortunately.

This is not one of those times, but you cannot automatically dismiss a change that's necessary just because it may remove options from the players.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#32 - 2015-03-31 13:26:28 UTC
I simply do not care one way or the other about over sized prop mods but I wanted to inject some thoughts just because.
Yep got the kevlar and nomex suits on so blast away, besides these are just thoughts in a general sense about this and not suggestions of what to change or not change

The way I see this the over sized prop mod is just another form of the power power creep that seems to be sweeping through the game despite all the tiercide and ship balancing that is going one currently. Is that good or bad really depends on your point of view.

If you are the one using it an you benefit from it then it is good.
If you are trying to counter it then it is bad.

Not going to post a world of stats because they are worthless to change minds for the most part but after programming some simulations and watching them run here are some thoughts.

Over sized prop mod use is in a bad place right now. I am not saying that their use in a general sense is bad, just that the current state of the situation is potentially OP and I am surprised by some of your responses. Many that have posted here are quick to point out when an idea posted on these forums has no real counter, yet in this debate you fully support a current situation that has extremely limited or perhaps even no effective counters. Gives on cause to wonder.

Ships can easily be fit that outrun all forms of damage, they are so fast that drones cannot effectively apply damage, when properly flown the are to fast for any of the current turrets to track and most of the current missiles and rockets cannot hit them for enough damage to matter. Is this situation good or bad? again that depends, but if we are trying to make changes to the game that promote conflict between players then these over sized prop mod fits seem to go counter to that desire.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#33 - 2015-03-31 13:33:05 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Missiles being able to ignore your own speeds and relative movement is the problem. Or will be. Almost anything small can go so fast it can't track or be tracked - except missile hulls and the existing ones aren't that DPSy

The problem with this is hitting the target is not the important part, the important part is how much damage can these missiles/rockets apply. Based on the current formulas and the state of the over sized prop mod use the answer is not enough to be of any use. At the speeds many of these fits are flying at they are literally faster than the explosion from the missile/rocket that is supposed to damage them so the target takes very little and in some cases no damage at all.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#34 - 2015-03-31 13:44:25 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Missiles being able to ignore your own speeds and relative movement is the problem. Or will be. Almost anything small can go so fast it can't track or be tracked - except missile hulls and the existing ones aren't that DPSy

The problem with this is hitting the target is not the important part, the important part is how much damage can these missiles/rockets apply. Based on the current formulas and the state of the over sized prop mod use the answer is not enough to be of any use. At the speeds many of these fits are flying at they are literally faster than the explosion from the missile/rocket that is supposed to damage them so the target takes very little and in some cases no damage at all.


I'm talking about the caldari T3 dessie using an oversized mod to be all but untrackable by anything, whilst firing high DPS (for the size class) weapons which will ignore the firing ships own absolute velocity and angular/transversal velocity.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#35 - 2015-03-31 13:44:44 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Missiles being able to ignore your own speeds and relative movement is the problem. Or will be. Almost anything small can go so fast it can't track or be tracked - except missile hulls and the existing ones aren't that DPSy

The problem with this is hitting the target is not the important part, the important part is how much damage can these missiles/rockets apply. Based on the current formulas and the state of the over sized prop mod use the answer is not enough to be of any use. At the speeds many of these fits are flying at they are literally faster than the explosion from the missile/rocket that is supposed to damage them so the target takes very little and in some cases no damage at all.


you misunderstand he is saying that the person shooting the missiles does not take a penalty


however properly piloting a turret ship you can manage your cycles and flying to manage this same thing

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2015-03-31 13:46:34 UTC
Yes, I suppose the tl;dr is the missile ship can NEVER go too fast for its weapons to track.

Hell of a lot harder in a turret ship though, especially with oversized mods.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#37 - 2015-03-31 13:55:07 UTC
Am I getting this?

The new T3 destroyers are too good w/ oversized prop mods, so the OP is calling for a nerf.... well just plain not allowing.... oversized prop mods across the board?

Overall I'd say oversized prop mods are OK on t1 and t2 ships. It starts to get a bit silly when you put them on t3 cruisers. It gets really silly w/ t3 destroyers? Is that about right?

I think the incoming rebalanceing of t3 cruises will (hoping hoping hoping) adjust oversized AB stuff.

I haven't taken the time yet to mess around w/ the t3 destroyers so I'll break w/ this forums tradition and remain silent on something I don't know about.

OK, maybe just a little. I'm hearing that the t3 destroyers are quite nasty. I think if CCP keeps their max DPS down to reasonable numbers (that's reduce ship damage based on it's high versatility) then they will be OK long term. For now, keep buying them hand over fist to keep my profit margins up. (if you want to buy them direct, then contact me in game)
Zura Namee
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2015-03-31 14:54:34 UTC
Why not just make oversized prop mods have oversized sig increases? Keep current fitting exactly the same, but give a 10mn AB sig bloom if fit on a frig/dessie.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#39 - 2015-03-31 14:56:48 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Yes, I suppose the tl;dr is the missile ship can NEVER go too fast for its weapons to track.

Hell of a lot harder in a turret ship though, especially with oversized mods.



they can also NEVER apply full dps to a target that is smaller than expl vel no matter how slow it is going while the current D3s can

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2015-03-31 15:00:16 UTC
Indeed but it's rarely an issue for light missiles.