These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[June] [Updated] Module Tiericide - Afterburners & Microwarpdrives

First post First post
Author
Basil Pupkin
Strategic Incompetence
#201 - 2015-05-05 03:28:45 UTC
Galphii wrote:
Uh, is the "compact" 100mn AB going to make it easier to fit those ridiculous 100mn AB tengu fits? Because they need to die.

Somebody has missed the T3 nerf.

Being teh freightergankbear automatically puts you below missionbear and minerbear in carebear hierarchy.

If you're about to make "this will make eve un-eve" argument, odds are you are defending some utterly horrible mechanics against a good change.

Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#202 - 2015-05-05 03:30:35 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Zeus Cronus wrote:
Ppl complaining about these ships going to fast sure as hell got teflon brains, or are just to young to remember.


Said the two day old troll and was never heard from again


well my crow used to go 10km/s and I think that was with a few 3% implants and a zors (and meh skills). Although I guess the polycarbon rigs cost 50mil each, or something.

I think DHB's mach did 15km/s (possible overstatement, pre-first nano nerf, or maybe with links?), and I teamwork crow did 18km/s. that dude used to fit an Estamel's BCU on a crow for lulz have a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksOJQ5biQmI

speeds used to be a bit crazy....

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Jenshae Chiroptera
#203 - 2015-05-05 04:04:08 UTC
Basil Pupkin wrote:
Galphii wrote:
Uh, is the "compact" 100mn AB going to make it easier to fit those ridiculous 100mn AB tengu fits? Because they need to die.
Somebody has missed the T3 nerf.
Training the right subsystem(s) to V brings the ships back up to what people were flying them on IV. Blink

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#204 - 2015-05-05 04:31:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I thought there was a mathematical reason for 1MN, 10MN, and 100MN: the MN stands for million Newtons, and it's supposed to represent how much force is applied. Now the actual force value is 1.5, 15, and 150, but that is because an additional 0.5, 5, or 50 million kilograms of mass has been added. It's part of how the speed calculation works.

Please leave the MWDs with the old numbers. But I would like to see a 2MN and 20MN variant of each, with matching stats. There are a few destroyers and battlecruisers that would love to use such modules.




I would like to see the meta variants not all be listed at meta 1. Perhaps the compact should be listed as meta 1, as it is clearly the weakest. Enduring could maybe be meta 2, and perhaps restrained could be meta 3?



Since there are only two meta variants for the afterburner (due to the restrained type not fitting afterburners), I propose a third meta variant for afterburners: Supercharged - activation 25; velocity bonus 132.5%

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#205 - 2015-05-05 05:07:43 UTC
In general I like these ideas..

But I have a proposal.. We mess with PG, CPU, Activation, Penalty, and now Sig and Speed.

How about dropping in a line with Overheat bonuses? Not just for these, but all active modules.. Less Speed, more sig, more cap, either better Overheat speed or better overheat sustainability..
Rob Kashuken
Row Row Fight the Power
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#206 - 2015-05-05 07:38:39 UTC
Add me to the voices concerned over speed creep. I think that increasing the meta level should only result in decreasing the fitting requirements and/or base cap usage.

Whilst off-topic for this thread, is there any intent to look at a Tieracide for ewar modules anytime soon?

Zeus Cronus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#207 - 2015-05-05 07:56:05 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Zeus Cronus wrote:
Ppl complaining about these ships going to fast sure as hell got teflon brains, or are just to young to remember.


Said the two day old troll and was never heard from again

Oh sorry, didnt know that a 2012 char was a two day old troll... Why dont you go back to you cave, and try to not live up to the alliance name as fully as you do Roll
Those 88 kills you got on eve-kill really makes you an expert on the subject of this i guess Roll
MukkBarovian
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#208 - 2015-05-05 08:09:07 UTC
I like it.

I'm not worried about speed power creep because these changes are tiny. The differentiation of the different mods looks fine and somewhat interesting.
Diabolus Darkdoom
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#209 - 2015-05-05 08:09:55 UTC
Why is there still no mention of 1000/5000mn prop mods for caps? Sad
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#210 - 2015-05-05 08:17:13 UTC
Diabolus Darkdoom wrote:
Why is there still no mention of 1000/5000mn prop mods for caps? Sad

Because why do you want to nerf the Phoenix more?
Diabolus Darkdoom
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#211 - 2015-05-05 08:19:39 UTC
No Idea what you're on about, the Phoenix is amazing.
Red Irondoll
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#212 - 2015-05-05 08:29:51 UTC
Hello,

I like the changes.
But names stills too long and mwd speed creep is unnecessary IMO
a max speed bonus 500% is enough if you want add speed
diffences, just lower the basic bonus to 450/480%.

Thank you.
BackstreetsRoy
Bittan Research
#213 - 2015-05-05 08:44:43 UTC
The change to 5/50/500 makes perfect sense and I support that. Why people are complaining that its "more confusing" is beyond me. Its a MWD and it boosts five times as much.

Seriously, we play this complex game and THIS is too much for some???? I'm more inclined to think people are either OCD on names or are worried that their spreadsheets or other such DIY software creations are not going to work is their real reason for whining over this.

Speed creep - well I'll trust CCP on this one. I like the idea of getting an increase and if that causes problems then let CCP adjust in the future. More variations in benefits/drawbacks is a good thing imo. Definitely against the idea of nerfing low end to reduce speed creep.

Y-S and Y-T, for the information of the younger players, is exactly how it used to be and I for one like the extra flavour introduced (maybe I am being a bit nostalgic here). Having said that I wouldn't want this carried too far - maybe just a few occassions and not toally back to the old nightmare days off so many different names to use.

Cheers Roy




afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#214 - 2015-05-05 09:09:12 UTC
OK so it's not going to be popular but maybe the ACTUAL problem with speed creep is the stacking of links, drugs and implants.

How bad are these ships without these things? Maybe some (more?) stacking penalties need to apply (or are in the pipe). Or only pick the highest and ignore the rest.


Strikes me that, like so many thing in EVE, they're ok until you double/triple up on them via other means.

tl;dr: I have a strong suspicion that the prop mods aren't actually the villains here.
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
#215 - 2015-05-05 10:10:49 UTC  |  Edited by: HandelsPharmi
A few persons think the 5/50/500 MN MWD will be 5 times faster than before...

Funny, they haven`t understood the physical mechanics yet :(


Renaming +1
Tiericide (Meta levels) +1
market speculation +1
McChicken Combo HalfMayo
The Happy Meal
#216 - 2015-05-05 10:39:19 UTC
Don't listen to these skeezballs complaining about the renames. Y-S8 and Cold-Gas are legend!

There are all our dominion

Gate camps: "Its like the lowsec watercooler, just with explosions and boose" - Ralph King-Griffin

Ddolik
Bohemian Veterans
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#217 - 2015-05-05 10:57:46 UTC
please do not boost any mwd, more likely nerf them all by 15% atleast.

The 5 50 500 is very cool

and boost littlebit ABs
CCP Larrikin
C C P
C C P Alliance
#218 - 2015-05-05 11:18:32 UTC
First up, thanks mates for all the awesome feedback!

Masao Kurata wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
With a Gistii A-Type 1/5MN Microwarpdrive fit Garmur (3x faction overdrives, high grade snakes, zor's custom navigation link, max fleet bonuses and quafe zero) in KSpace I'm getting -
  • 9036 m/s Prepatch > 9327 m/s Postpatch
  • 13085 m/s Prepatch > 13140 m/s Postpatch Overloaded



You might want to recheck that, it's obvious that the difference should be larger when hot.

I have, and its legit. Its because of the way overloading stacks with other bonuses.

TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:

With a Gistii A-Type 1/5MN Microwarpdrive fit Garmur (faction, snakes, zor's custom, and max fleet bonuses) in KSpace I'm getting -
  • 8606 m/s Prepatch > 8883 m/s Postpatch
  • 12462 m/s Prepatch > 12514 m/s Postpatch Overloaded



why are you okay with this? is it not obviously a problem to you?


Lets look at some other MWD speeds, across classes (regular / overloaded):
  • Regular Garmur (Gistii A-Type 1/5MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 5015 / 7251 > Post 5176 / 7281
  • Kestrel (Gistii A-Type 1/5MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 3480 / 5017 > Post 3770 / 5290
  • Svipul (Gistii A-Type 1/5MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 3572 / 5107 > Post 3683 / 5129
  • Orthrus (Gistii A-Type 10/50MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 3054 / 4421 > Post 3152 / 4439
  • Augoror Navy Issue (Gistii A-Type 10/50MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 1896 / 2719 > Post 1938 / 2705
  • Ishtar (Gistii A-Type 10/50MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 2084 / 3004 > Post 2149 / 3016
  • Drake (Gistii A-Type 10/50MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 1316 / 1882 > Post 1356 / 1889
  • Tornado (Gistii A-Type 10/50MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 2077 / 2968 > Post 2141 / 2980
  • Machariel (Gistii A-Type 100/500MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 1994 / 2885 > Post 2058 / 2897
  • Abaddon (Gistii A-Type 100/500MN MWD, Bonuses, Quafe Zero) Pre 896 / 1292 > Post 922 / 1294


We need to look at the entire meta, not just the edge cases. Do I like that Garmur going 13k/s? Not really, but that fit is worth over 2b (including implants) and has made a lot of sacrifices to go that fast

Arguing that 55m/s faster on a max speed fit overloading Garmur is going to break the meta is slightly ridiculous. I am not suggesting that we won't change the progression of speed bonuses on MWDs. Some of the ideas on this thread are solid and something we will be reviewing.

Lowering the overall bonuses from MWDs is not going to address the kiting issues being brought up in this thread. Stacking, bonuses & reviewing specific hulls are much better ways 'fix' that issue. Please be patient with us =)


Alexis Nightwish wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:

We are going to be watching how the small speed buff affects TQ. We've done a bunch of internal testing and don't expect it to have a large impact on the meta. That said, give us your feedback! There are 4 weeks till release.
Yeah but the current meta, (as it relates to speed), sucks!

Given that, I like the increase on speed for Afterburners, but I do NOT like the increase on speed for MWDs. EVE is already "Go MWD or go home." If anything, this rework should be used to reduce the speed bonus of MWDs. T1 should be +400%, Officer should be +500%, and everything else in the middle.

Please see my above comments. To add to that, we'd rather have a small progression between Meta 0 and Meta 17 modules. Having even a larger difference between new players (using meta 0 & 1 modules) and veterans (using Meta 15 to 17 modules) is not something we consider desirable.


Alundil wrote:
It's like debating the color and intensity of the flames in a burning building....while standing in said burning building.

This is Eve =)

afkalt wrote:
tl;dr: I have a strong suspicion that the prop mods aren't actually the villains here.

Give this man a cookie!

Game Designer | Team Phenomenon | https://twitter.com/CCP_Larrikin

Ju0ZaS
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#219 - 2015-05-05 11:23:07 UTC
People complainig bout some speed creep... Probay the nubs that aproach f1 everything in their slow ass buffer ship and can't see past the exchange of dps vs buffer/rep amount.

Are you going to fight me or do you expect to bore me to death with your forum pvp?

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#220 - 2015-05-05 11:28:20 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:


We need to look at the entire meta, not just the edge cases. Do I like that Garmur going 13k/s? Not really, but that fit is worth over 2b (including implants) and has made a lot of sacrifices to go that fast

Arguing that 55m/s faster on a max speed fit overloading Garmur is going to break the meta is slightly ridiculous. I am not suggesting that we won't change the progression of speed bonuses on MWDs. Some of the ideas on this thread are solid and something we will be reviewing.

Lowering the overall bonuses from MWDs is not going to address the kiting issues being brought up in this thread. Stacking, bonuses & reviewing specific hulls are much better ways 'fix' that issue. Please be patient with us =)



I was more going for the game already being broken, and that until you nerf link range and effectiveness, you are all baddies.