Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
|
CCP Gargant
C C P C C P Alliance
878
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
Oceanus is released next week and with it starts the advertised module rebalancing. To start out with the team decided to target eight specific groups of modules and CCP Fozzie has written a dev blog to explain the reasoning, method, and the groups.
Head on over here to check it out.
Oceanus is released on Tuesday, September 30th. These changes are looking very good. What do you think? CCP Gargant | EVE Universe esports Coordinator |
|
Cristl
Perkone Caldari State
138
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
First, but where is the actual blog? |
Mashie Saldana
BFG Tech
1171
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:18:00 -
[3] - Quote
Second, time to read a blog. Mashie Saldana Dominique Vasilkovsky
|
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
833
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
I think you screwed up Restrained Capacitor Flux Coil, as they're flatly better in every way than the T2 version. Aside from that this looks like a good design philosophy for named mods. |
|
CCP Gargant
C C P C C P Alliance
878
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:29:00 -
[5] - Quote
Fixed missing links and cleaned a few posts up CCP Gargant | EVE Universe esports Coordinator |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
803
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
I'm glad to see the normalization of faction mods, but I'm a little worried about Warp Scramblers (which are obviously not being touched right now.) Currently, the True Sansha warp scrambler has 3 points, compared to all the other faction warp scramblers which have 2 points. Is there any thought to allowing similar variations in faction modules in the same vein as named modules are now? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Seolfor
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:32:00 -
[7] - Quote
x |
TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Intrepid Crossing
287
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
@Fozzie
So "upgraded" are just generally better than T1 (m0), then what's the point of T1 meta 0 items? There should be some kind of draw backs to say T1 is generally better and all of these have a benefit that is offset by a slight Nerf in these other areas. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1301
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
Finally!
I've been waiting for informations about this for weeks
You teased me too much guys :( Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Argent Rotineque
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:35:00 -
[10] - Quote
It would seem like there could be more room for differentiation if meta items that were restrained or compact kept the benefits closer to meta 0 (with the advantage being a larger reduction in fitting cost/drawback) and that would allow all items to have an upgraded option in addition to the fitting items. |
|
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
889
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:35:00 -
[11] - Quote
So now all the mods sound the same . |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
2702
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:35:00 -
[12] - Quote
Slightly off topic, but I feel this is an appropriate time and topic to start the debate.
Any plans to create module groups based on ship / hull size alongside the relevant optimal / falloff / strength bonuses?
i.e: Small Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for frigates and dessies that can only tackle smaller hulls at close range Med Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for cruisers and BCs that can only tackle medium hulls at med range Large Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for Battleships and larger Industrials that can only tackle large hulls at long range Capital Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for Capitals that can only tackle capital and super hulls across grid
I don't see a point in having small / med / large Neuts / Nosses / guns if we don't apply the same logic to medium slots of an offensive / remote boosting nature.
Preventing sub capitals from engaging and locking down everything in the game with a module nerf like this would open up allot of room for Capital hull role expansion.... Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk! |
Skyler Hawk
The Scope Gallente Federation
22
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:39:00 -
[13] - Quote
Will tiericide enable faction weapons such as the repuglic fleet LMLs mentioned in the blog to benefit from the T2 weapon specialization skills and use T2 ammo? If not, it's still hard to see them getting much use outside of niche situations. |
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
504
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:40:00 -
[14] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:I think you screwed up Restrained Capacitor Flux Coil, as they're flatly better in every way than the T2 version. Aside from that this looks like a good design philosophy for named mods.
This. It doesn't follow the theme at all... Its even more powerful then the cosmos versions Blue-Fire Best Fire |
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes
16
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:41:00 -
[15] - Quote
Asuka Solo wrote:Slightly off topic, but I feel this is an appropriate time and topic to start the debate.
Any plans to create module groups based on ship / hull size alongside the relevant optimal / falloff / strength bonuses?
i.e: Small Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for frigates and dessies that can only tackle smaller hulls at close range Med Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for cruisers and BCs that can only tackle medium hulls at med range Large Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for Battleships and larger Industrials that can only tackle large hulls at long range Capital Warp disruptors / Scrams / Webs for Capitals that can only tackle capital and super hulls across grid
I don't see a point in having small / med / large Neuts / Nosses / guns if we don't apply the same logic to medium slots of an offensive / remote boosting nature.
Preventing sub capitals from engaging and locking down everything in the game with a module nerf like this would open up allot of room for Capital hull role expansion....
Having to drop caps to hold down other caps ... that sounds more like a jail free card for everyone ratting in a carrier. but nice try. |
IIIMAPOBOgKA
Babylon Knights The Unthinkables
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
What will happen with invention where you could "sacrifice" a meta 4 module to augment your success rate if all the mods are dropping to meta 1 ? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
11351
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:42:00 -
[17] - Quote
Hey everyone, the overall module rework has been a long time coming and it feels great to start rolling it out! Hopefully these changes and the ones that follow will help make your fitting experience a more engaging one. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1301
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:44:00 -
[18] - Quote
I don't understand why the "Restrained Capacitor Flux Coil" should have better stats AND lower fitting requirements than the T2 variation.
Its 100% worse to fit the T2, something that shouldn't happen right AFTER a module rebalance Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Adrie Atticus
The Shadow Plague The Bastion
379
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:44:00 -
[19] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone, the overall module rework has been a long time coming and it feels great to start rolling it out! Hopefully these changes and the ones that follow will help make your fitting experience a more engaging one.
You screwed up on Cap Flux Coil, new meta 1 is better than T2. |
Obil Que
Star Explorers Reckoning Star Alliance
126
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
IIIMAPOBOgKA wrote:What will happen with invention where you could "sacrifice" a meta 4 module to augment your success rate if all the mods are dropping to meta 1 ?
Methinks you missed a dev blog
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/lighting-the-invention-bulb/
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
803
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:45:00 -
[21] - Quote
Another restriction that has been somewhat weird to me is with faction guns / launchers. Currently, faction guns and missile launchers have been strictly inferior to T2, because they can't use T2 ammo. This is especially important for Projectiles and Lasers, in which Barrage and Scorch are basic requirements. Has any thought been given to allowing T2 ammo to be used in faction guns / launchers? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Makari Aeron
The Shadow's Of Eve TSOE Consortium
108
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
I'm glad to see this finally rolling out. Yall had been talking about this sort of thing for over a year. *thumbs up let's do this*
I am slightly concerned these changes (more so changes to other modules) may make certain fits unusable due to the tightness of the fits. CCP RedDawn:Ugly people are just playing life on HARD mode. Personally, I'm playing on an INFERNO difficulty..||| CCP Goliath:I often believe that the best way to get something done is to shout at the person trying to help you. ||| CCP Goliath:http://goo.gl/PKGDPZ |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
834
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:47:00 -
[23] - Quote
Querns wrote:Another restriction that has been somewhat weird to me is with faction guns / launchers. Currently, faction guns and missile launchers have been strictly inferior to T2, because they can't use T2 ammo. This is especially important for Projectiles and Lasers, in which Barrage and Scorch are basic requirements. Has any thought been given to allowing T2 ammo to be used in faction guns / launchers? Yeah, I agree with this: you need to take a close look at this issue and either let them use T2 ammo or give them bonuses at the higher levels that make the tradeoff worth it. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3883
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:48:00 -
[24] - Quote
IIIMAPOBOgKA wrote:What will happen with invention where you could "sacrifice" a meta 4 module to augment your success rate if all the mods are dropping to meta 1 ?
As stated in the devblog about invention, that's being removed. Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
IIIMAPOBOgKA
Babylon Knights The Unthinkables
3
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:48:00 -
[25] - Quote
thanks ! indeed missed that one ! |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
193
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:49:00 -
[26] - Quote
Aquila Sagitta wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:I think you screwed up Restrained Capacitor Flux Coil, as they're flatly better in every way than the T2 version. Aside from that this looks like a good design philosophy for named mods. This. It doesn't follow the theme at all... Its even more powerful then the cosmos versions Well spotted, this should actually be -25% (which is what you'll see on Sisi just now). We'll get that changed in the blog.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/ccp_lebowski |
|
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
504
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:54:00 -
[27] - Quote
Could we get some numbers on the new cap flux coil vs cap power relays?
You nearly doubled the regen but you also doubled the penalties which makes me think they will still be useless or even worse then before. Blue-Fire Best Fire |
PinkKnife
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
505
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:54:00 -
[28] - Quote
So, while we're at this, what's the point of having multiple faction variants that are essentially the same thing? Do we really need a Cal navy and a Gurista/ Dread Gurista variation of a module that all have the same damn attributes?
It makes sense that say Sansha and True Sansha might have different power levels.
It doesn't make sense that Sansha and Guristas have the same power levels.
Is it a matter of just having lore related item drops for different factions of space? If so, that's idiotic and should be removed. |
Adaahh Gee
Sarz'na Khumatari The Unthinkables
120
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:55:00 -
[29] - Quote
No no no no no no no
Please don't start renaming modules again, the naming of modules is very important for immersion of players and is a known nomenclature by players that have been in game for some time. it is also a right of passage for newer players to learn these things. I remember when the MWD's were renamed, missile launchers and missiles followed (and were swiftly changed back after community outcry)
Will ship names follow? Will my Atron become a "Restrained Gallente Frigate I", as that is the route you are going down.
By all means, sort out the imbalances that allow meta 4 to be a better option than T2 (Webs, scrams, ECM etc) but please leave the names alone. |
RenoIdo
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2014.09.25 16:57:00 -
[30] - Quote
Are small balance and graphics patches all we can expect from now on?
I have been playing since 2010 and all that's been added is just a little fluff on top of the same exact game I've been playing this whole time, and... some balancing.
The facts:
1) No real expansion since 2010
2) Game has lost subs and average concurrent players every year since 2010
3) CCP is being so poorly managed they can't see the correlation between facts 1 and 2. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |