These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#261 - 2015-05-06 05:49:37 UTC
Solj RichPopolous wrote:
If the ship is moving that fast he is going to be a pee shooter that can't hurt you or not able to apply any real dps anyway, and that goes for any ship just about.
Umm... missiles damage application isn't affected by how fast the ship firing it is going, only the speed of the ship its intending to hit.
Solj RichPopolous
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#262 - 2015-05-06 09:39:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Solj RichPopolous
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Solj RichPopolous wrote:
If the ship is moving that fast he is going to be a pee shooter that can't hurt you or not able to apply any real dps anyway, and that goes for any ship just about.
Umm... missiles damage application isn't affected by how fast the ship firing it is going, only the speed of the ship its intending to hit.


Who cares about missiles? Do they actually damage things?

Edit: I guess im not being fair to the rest of EVE and only thinking of my play style which obsoletes missile damage application. I guess for your average player this could be problematic.
Madeleine Lemmont
Ars Vivendi
#263 - 2015-05-06 11:41:30 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
I like the module teiracide project as a whole but I don't like that it has been leaving manufacture-able T1 items in an all but useless state.

Me too.
Compact -> Lower Fitting needs but same mastereffect as standard T1.
recent Meta3/4 -> much higher master effect but should have a bit higher fitting needs than standard T1 too.
Bagrat Skalski
Koinuun Kotei
#264 - 2015-05-06 12:46:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagrat Skalski
Monopropellant is too hard on eyes. High-impulse is better.
erg cz
ErgoDron
#265 - 2015-05-06 13:12:46 UTC
Renaming is crap, IMHO. First - names are not getting simplier, they are getting more complicated. Second - I can not use 10mn mask in EFT tool to get both afterburner and MWD. Now if I want to play around with fitting, I can write "10MN" into search column and I will get both MWD and AB so I can switch them easely. With 5xMN reserved for MWD this will not work any more. Same with eve central or any other tool, where you want to see all prop modules for certain class in one list.

Rebalance prop modules - yes, renaming - 'no'. Big 'no'
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#266 - 2015-05-06 14:01:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
I really, strongly dislike the MWD changes. This creates tiers if anything. Also indirectly giving frigates and cruisers more speed is just... really? Why not just delete battlecruisers and battleships from the game?

All the MWD line really needs is:

Tech 1: Cheap
Meta A: Easy to fit
Meta B: Lower sig bloom penalty
Tech 2: Lower cap penalty (much lower than currently as right now the higher activation cost negates the lower cap penalty benefit, hence why no one really uses T2)


Well technically all mwds are getting buffed. Not just frig/cruiser mwd. So BC/BS will be faster too. But still in the same spot they are now. So its cancels out.

BCs are BS have other tools available to get engagements without having to go faster. Not sure why people keep asking for speed buffs to bcs/bs. Did we forget nano phoons/canes? I personally dont want to see 2500m/s phoons flying around as it seems silly. And with people like Chessur making good use of nano bhal/geddon, i dont see a reason to arbitrarily buff bc/bs speed to keep up with smaller ships.

BCs are damaged, because they have no way to do anything to cruisers in most cases. They lack projection. If they have a way to reach out and hit cruisers, then speed becomes a non-issue. Once BCs become useful again, then BS will have their role back at killing BCs. If BS become popular again, then cruisers/HACS can counter them fairly easily. Ship food chain is complete and working as intended. For now though, BCs get killed by kite cruisers very easily (unless mjd fit) and just screws up 2 classes of ships. This started after they rebalanced all the cruisers, making them faster to the point BCs struggle to keep up against the slowest ones. Give BCs a projection role bonus, and that might level the playing field a bit.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#267 - 2015-05-06 14:13:34 UTC
4MN MWD
50MN MWD
600MN MWD

There's a nerf to small micros (which I admit wouldn't be needed if the combination of links and Snakes was nerfed), and a buff to large micros, which should make BS pilots happy.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#268 - 2015-05-06 14:40:10 UTC
erg cz wrote:
Renaming is crap, IMHO. First - names are not getting simplier, they are getting more complicated. Second - I can not use 10mn mask in EFT tool to get both afterburner and MWD.
Why would you want to? I hate accidentally clicking on an AB when I should have clicked on a MWD. Name Change +1.

Sucks when you install the wrong prop mod type in-game.
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Virtus Crusade Protectorate
#269 - 2015-05-06 16:26:43 UTC
CCP: Like others have said - my votes...


1) Do not increase the top MWD speeds, if anything nerf the lower ends. I personally would like to see the whole scale dropped to make Afterburners more feasible.

or

1a) Buff Afterburners!!!!!! - However I second what many are saying about speed VS. Server ticks. I think grid speed should be dropped overall. IF you look at the impact of boosters, drugs, Wormhole effects, High-end modules/ships....we have enough speed. Kiting is the meta already just a tad too much. (ISHTARs online....HALF of that equation is speed versus....the other half was the sentries.) Just a thought!!!

2) Fix T2 MWDs to make them feasible again.

3) I like the new 5mn scheme and the new modules.

4) CAPITAL SIZED PROP MODS!

Phaade
Proioxis Assault Force
Rogue Caldari Union
#270 - 2015-05-06 22:01:08 UTC
Solj RichPopolous wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
Gorski Car wrote:
Nice to see that t2 mwds are actually faster now. But really do we need more speed creep in eve? it feels like ships are super fast right now and that creates some problems in my opinion. In a vacum they might be okish whats most important is what you guys are planning to do with links since they heavily affect this as well. For certain ships these changes might be terrifying though. Garmurs doing 10k m/s or stilettos burning 100km and tackeling you before you can lock them.


This. Kiting is already the go-to meta.



Of course its the go to meta. Its the only one that requires situational and spatial awareness and just in general brain power. I love fighting kiters as well as being one. Seems like everyone just wants the game to be train for proteus and vindicator and hit approach and f1 with as little brain power needed as possible. This is space if you want things that sit still while you shoot at them go play WoT.


Forgive me but I don't pay to win. My scram doesn't reach 17km. I get 11km. Clearly your piloting requires "superior brain power."
Phaade
Proioxis Assault Force
Rogue Caldari Union
#271 - 2015-05-06 22:03:34 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Why not just nerf speed links now if they are admitted to be a key problem?



Finally some sense!!
Cleanse Serce
Les Petits Pedestres
Toilet Paper.
#272 - 2015-05-06 23:25:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Cleanse Serce
Any kind of link is a problem.

Why nerf link exclusivly and only for speed ?

The progression thing is quite awsome, just lower it for Velocity Bonus, like idk :


5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 495
5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 500
5MN Cold-Gas Enduring Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 500
5MN Quad LiF Restrained Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 500
5MN Microwarpdrive II : Velocity Bonus 505
5MN Digital Booster Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 505
Federation Navy 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 507
Shadow Serpentis 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 507
Republic Fleet 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 507
Domination 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 507
Coreli C-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 509
Gistii C-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 509
Coreli B-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 511
Gistii B-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 511
Coreli A-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 513
Gistii A-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive : Velocity Bonus 513

Or raise Activation Cost, lower Cycle.. idk.
But links aren't the issue at all.
Lug Muad'Dib
Funk'in Hole
French ConneXion.
#273 - 2015-05-06 23:43:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Lug Muad'Dib
Good job, i love this tiericide.
And i don't understand what 2% speed buff for deadspace mwd will change Roll it will almost make no diferrence in real combat situation..
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#274 - 2015-05-07 00:23:41 UTC
Lug Muad'Dib wrote:
Good job, i love this tiericide.
And i don't unerstant what 2% speed buff for deadspace mwd will change Roll it will almost make no diferrence in real combat situation..



you are looking at one number. all attributes combined make them the better module. if all you want is speed its probably not worth it

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Crimsons Storm
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#275 - 2015-05-07 03:39:56 UTC
Quote:
Goals of Module Tiericide - Reduce unnecessary complexity


So increasing the amount of propulsion modules by way of giving us more modules with differing benefits and at the same time renaming some of the subtypes, you create less complexity ?

CCP logic at it finest

I applaud some of the changes...i however disagree to the notion that you are making it simpler
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#276 - 2015-05-07 05:58:28 UTC
Ms Michigan wrote:
1) Do not increase the top MWD speeds, if anything nerf the lower ends. I personally would like to see the whole scale dropped to make Afterburners more feasible.

or

1a) Buff Afterburners!!!!!! - However I second what many are saying about speed VS. Server ticks. I think grid speed should be dropped overall. IF you look at the impact of boosters, drugs, Wormhole effects, High-end modules/ships....we have enough speed. Kiting is the meta already just a tad too much. (ISHTARs online....HALF of that equation is speed versus....the other half was the sentries.) Just a thought!!!

Howabout add something to close the gap a bit? Doesn't need to be a new module type, instead I propose prop mod scripts:
Afterburner script: increases speed a lot but greatly increases capacitor consumption to an amount higher than MWD consumes
MWD script: reduces speed a lot, but reduces sig penalty a lot more

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."

James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#277 - 2015-05-07 07:49:05 UTC
Thank you so much for making the deadspace ABs all the same speed. I am sure the other folks who chose them based on the speed bonus are all cheering. Really.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Spugg Galdon
Last Rites.
Villore Accords
#278 - 2015-05-07 08:36:52 UTC
Why do the Gistii and Corellii MWD's have the same speed bonus? This is pure homogenization of those two lines of modules.

One should give very high speed with higher cap consumption

The other should give T2 speed with heavily reduced drawbacks (v.low sig penalty and capacitor penalty)

This way the Deadspace modules would have differentiation.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#279 - 2015-05-07 08:57:13 UTC
Wait wut...

You want to Differentiate and OFFER CHOICE and the whole "fitting vs speed" thing was a valid choice and now it isnt? Seems eeehm, Counter productive...
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#280 - 2015-05-07 09:07:57 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Why do the Gistii and Corellii MWD's have the same speed bonus? This is pure homogenization of those two lines of modules.

One should give very high speed with higher cap consumption

The other should give T2 speed with heavily reduced drawbacks (v.low sig penalty and capacitor penalty)

This way the Deadspace modules would have differentiation.

Also the ABs are homogenized, when it was a much bigger range on ABs than MWDs before.
It is like they went with the difference that most people cared least about as the major distinction. This aggravates me.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp