open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked New Modules the game could really use...
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Gierling
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:06:00 - [1]
 

Ok Yell at me if these are stupid, but I'm drunk and ranty so I'll go ahead anyway.


Modules that really need to be in the game as I see it: Discuss.

Falloff improvement modules, improves falloff and signature resolution as an alternative to tracking enhancers and tracking comps. A godsend to Blasters and autocannons (which both need luv), as well as another option to tracking comps.

MISSILLE VELOCITY MODULES!, The Raven can play in a fleet fight barely... these would let other ships have that option. Currently there is no missile alternative to the Tracking comp, a module that allows you to boost the speed (and explosion radius) of your missilles would be very welcome. It would make the Raven a deadly adversary in a fleet fight (At the expense of its tank, there really is no offensive modules for its mids currently) as well as introduce all sorts of caldari ships to the battlespace.

EW that redirects target lock, There is currently NO feasible way to escort a ship with fewer hitpoints then yourself. Perhaps a module that allows everyone (or maybe just a percentage change, or a discrete amount) who targets say that juicy hauler to instead redirect to your nice tanked battleship instead. Of course being a hero has its price, the module would increase your sig radius by 30%, decrease your shields AND armour by 25% AND increase the cap cost of armour repariers by 25% and the cycle time of shield boosters by 30%. Possibly more.

Ok that redirector is probably the most controversial idea I'll admit, I'm just tired of escort being so binary, bring more ships then your enemies could ever possibly take on or just lose your gaurded assets while the defending fleet watches.

I think theres room for another Missile module that increases flight time and explosion speed perhaps... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.

Drone Damage mods, tux says this is coming but what the heck.

EW Damage mods, you know what I mean increase the range, fallof, effectiveness of your EW... TOMB said this would come when ECM countermeasure were improved but I'll add support for the idea.

Propulsion disruption augments... I'm not too sure about this... but a way to increase the range and strength of your scramblers and webbers... probably as a high slot at least. Playing with fire, maybe a hefty cap use so that frigs could only run it for 30 seconds or so and there is tradeoffs... or even better a huge sig increase while its on.

Comments?

Meridius
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:13:00 - [2]
 

Originally by: Gierling

... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.



Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.

Gierling
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:19:00 - [3]
 

Originally by: Meridius


Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.


ok, Defenders that attack the nearest missile regardless of its target and point defense turrets tat use small ammo... bammo! Problem solved.

BTW, Meridius I've missed testing stuff against you on testserver... tell them to bring back sisi.

Natsuki
Caldari
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:23:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Natsuki on 02/04/2006 08:24:17
Quote:
EW that redirects target lock,


That is the equivalent of "hate" skills in other MMOGs. which is a decent idea. I think it should "change" the active target of the enemy ship to yourself, with all modules active.

which means..

OH EM GEE

A reason to used tanked (NOT GANK) ships in pvp. Again, OH EM GEE.

Soyemia
Minmatar
Rionnag Alba
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:26:00 - [5]
 

Missiles are already overpowered, and defenders are a joke, they dont hit even heavy/torps.

Natsuki
Caldari
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:30:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Soyemia
Missiles are already overpowered, and defenders are a joke, they dont hit even heavy/torps.


They hit torps. They don't hit cruise and heavies because their velocity is too fast, and defensers weren't coded to handle it or someething.

Anyway there need to be missile tracking mods, and missile tracking disruptor mods.

HippoKing
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:32:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Natsuki
Originally by: Soyemia
Missiles are already overpowered, and defenders are a joke, they dont hit even heavy/torps.


They hit torps. They don't hit cruise and heavies because their velocity is too fast, and defensers weren't coded to handle it or someething.

Anyway there need to be missile tracking mods, and missile tracking disruptor mods.


they hit torps, but it takes 3 to kill each one, making it a bit useless

they hit cruise or heavies being fired from over about 40km away (of course depends on speed of missile)

Gierling
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:34:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Natsuki
Edited by: Natsuki on 02/04/2006 08:24:17

That is the equivalent of "hate" skills in other MMOGs.


I'm all for more Hate in Eve, heck I'm all for more Hate in general.

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:40:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Meridius
Originally by: Gierling

... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.



Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.


I dont see the need for this. There are no counters to drones or turret ammo so why should there be for missiles? Dont say smartbombs because they cant destroy today's heavy drones very well.

Lefia
Gallente
CONsordium Infinate
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:52:00 - [10]
 

There is a counter to turrets... high transversal. The counter to this, webs/target painter. However this also applies to missiles... so argument nullified by itself. Weeeeeeeee logic.

Negative Nancy
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:53:00 - [11]
 

Reducing armor is well, I don't mean to sound like a jerk here, but, it is rediculous. Armor is based on physical structure, so what do you want it to do? Make the atoms in the armor less cohesive? I could see reducing the effectiveness of hardeners maybe...maybe. Reducing the shield due to capacitor use sure. But that screws shield tankers and that makes the system balanced in favor or armor tankers...so I'm sure quite a few people would be less than happy about that. And what reason would it have to increase the cap useage for armor reps? Increasing cyle times also poses a problem because that depends on those specific modules, not on the cap. Penalties similar to MWD would probably be the most plausible/realistic approaches to this. Increasing signature size is right on track though, goes in line with forcing a lock on a certain ship.

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2006.04.02 08:56:00 - [12]
 

I dont see the need for this. There are no counters to drones or turret ammo so why should there be for missiles? Dont say smartbombs because they cant destroy today's heavy drones very well.

Against drones:
double web them and blast them to oblivion/web+ use own drones/use MISSILES!

Against "turret ammo":
ECM/tracking disruptor/transversal

Against missiles (including FOF):
Umm... defenders that barely work?

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 09:49:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Deva Blackfire
Against drones:
double web them and blast them to oblivion/web+ use own drones/use MISSILES!


Pretty tedious work to target each and every drone in every wave with a webber and then try to wear it down. Not to mention you will probably take fire or get nossed to death while spending time fighting the drones. But sure, its a defensive measure that is valid. You got a point there.

Quote:

Against "turret ammo":
ECM/tracking disruptor/transversal


All these things work against missiles as well, if they dont use fof missiles. FOF missiles do poor damage, so forcing people to use FOF is a defence in its own. Not a valid point imho.
Quote:

Against missiles (including FOF):
Umm... defenders that barely work?


You cant defend vs FOF, but you cant defend against the rest of the drones attacking you while you are fighting 1 of them either. Defenders do work, but they dont destroy the missile in one hit. If it did, it could be argued that drones should die to one missile as well.


Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
Cruel Intentions
Posted - 2006.04.02 10:24:00 - [14]
 

Defenders - They don't work. They're too slow on the up-take and tend to miss missiles because they want to hit them from behind it seems to me. Scrap them and make a utility flak cannon is my suggestion.

Flak Cannon as point defence - This is a tricky one, Gierling, if they target missiles indiscriminatly you're gonna be podded by your own Caldari-lovers. As a solution, a very short range can be implemented so that point defence ships need to position themselves correctly. Can also be coded to provide anti-drone defence.

Drone survivability - Like it or not, but drones and shooting drones down has been really poorly done by CCP. Drones need to be overhauled completely to gain some sort of balance. The problem is that if ONE drone is shot down on any ship but Ishtar or Dominix, that ship will have one less drone until it can replenish at a carrier or station, provided that carrier or station even has drones!
Tripple (3x) to quintruple (5x) drone bay and introduce a drone bay control points on each ship that limits max fieldable drones (as arbitrary example of drone limits 5, 10, or 20 where small take 1, medium 2 and large drones 4). Reduce production cost of drones (especially T2) and reduce hit points.

Counters to turrets - (EWar) and Transversal velocity. Everything highly effective.
Counters to rockets - ECM. It's a frigate module, though, so whatever.
Counters to missiles - Pure velocity and defenders. Rather ineffective due to high explosive velocity or high missile velocity, FoF ensures invincibility to EWar and it should be noted that damage loss is 25%.
Counters to torpedoes - EWar, pure velocity, and defenders. Of these defenders is the only one that is ineffective.

Counters generally - So what can be said? Throughout we notice that defenders really have no place in anyones fitting due to them being generally extremely ineffective, and that's not mentioning that they require a launcher hard point and a high slot!
The slow missiles - torpedoes and rockets - have a rather fair counter system which resembles turrets, although it should be noted that speed is more easily attainable than transversal velocity. In this case.
The fast missiles, however, are very, very, different. That's not a bad thing, but it should be noted that they are both impervious to common offensive methods such as capacitor drain and electronic warfare. A 25% damage loss is a lot better than a 100% damage loss, so even arguing that point is short sighted and not very bright. It is also with the fast missiles that the problem lies - before there is some sort of justice between damage done by these missiles and ordinary turrets, wouldn't you think that some sort of balance in counters must be achieved?
Fast missiles are nearly invulnerable to defenders, they are too fast (explosion velocity-wise) to be out-sped (is there such a verb?), and they have alternate attacks that negate electronic warfare. And they don't use capacitor.

Missile flight module - Extrapolating from Tracking Enhancers and Computers, these missile velocity modules would give a bonus of 20% to missile explosion velocity and 10% to missile velocity for a tech 1, non-meta, mid slot module (the low slot module would give 10% velocity and 7% explosion velocity).

Propulsion module - I think something along these lines is what CCP are trying to do when they were writing about over-charging modules in their in-development area (click patch-notes and then in-development)

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:05:00 - [15]
 


I must be ignorant, because i still dont see why missiles are so overpowered compared to drones. A brutix with t2 drones would eat a ferox with t2 missiles alive.

Hub Quantum
Eve Defence Force
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:21:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Meridius
Originally by: Gierling

... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.



Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.


I dont see the need for this. There are no counters to drones or turret ammo so why should there be for missiles? Dont say smartbombs because they cant destroy today's heavy drones very well.



There's a half dozen counters to turrets that do not apply to missiles and there is no equivalent for, such as transversal and things like getting inside optimal that a missile user doesn't even think about.

Drones have all of that as well (Drones consider transversal and optimal put your heavies on an interceptor if you don't believe it) AND they can be destroyed or left behind when you warp, not to mention they are their own worst enemy with dozens of bugs including a nasty bug that can get you concorded in high sec when they go off and randomly attack your gangmates.

Missiles do not need a boost, that's ridiculous. The raven excels in every aspect of the game except for fleet battles, it doesn't need to be one of the best at that too. It is hands down the best PVE BS and is one of the best ships in general to have in small scale PVP.

That aside, I do like the idea of a "hate" mod to actually give value to tanks.


Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:32:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Hub Quantum
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Meridius
Originally by: Gierling

... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.



Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.


I dont see the need for this. There are no counters to drones or turret ammo so why should there be for missiles? Dont say smartbombs because they cant destroy today's heavy drones very well.



There's a half dozen counters to turrets that do not apply to missiles and there is no equivalent for, such as transversal and things like getting inside optimal that a missile user doesn't even think about.

Drones have all of that as well (Drones consider transversal and optimal put your heavies on an interceptor if you don't believe it) AND they can be destroyed or left behind when you warp, not to mention they are their own worst enemy with dozens of bugs including a nasty bug that can get you concorded in high sec when they go off and randomly attack your gangmates.

Missiles do not need a boost, that's ridiculous. The raven excels in every aspect of the game except for fleet battles, it doesn't need to be one of the best at that too. It is hands down the best PVE BS and is one of the best ships in general to have in small scale PVP.

That aside, I do like the idea of a "hate" mod to actually give value to tanks.




Transversal affects missiles as well. I dont think that missiles should be boosted, but i dont think they should be nerfed either. Missiles dont even have the highest dps, far from it. But they hit for the same amount for every missile, with no wrecking and no misses. Thats why i like them, and i think a nerf is uncalled for.

Brieve
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:44:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Hub Quantum
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Meridius
Originally by: Gierling

... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.



Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.


I dont see the need for this. There are no counters to drones or turret ammo so why should there be for missiles? Dont say smartbombs because they cant destroy today's heavy drones very well.



There's a half dozen counters to turrets that do not apply to missiles and there is no equivalent for, such as transversal and things like getting inside optimal that a missile user doesn't even think about.

Drones have all of that as well (Drones consider transversal and optimal put your heavies on an interceptor if you don't believe it) AND they can be destroyed or left behind when you warp, not to mention they are their own worst enemy with dozens of bugs including a nasty bug that can get you concorded in high sec when they go off and randomly attack your gangmates.

Missiles do not need a boost, that's ridiculous. The raven excels in every aspect of the game except for fleet battles, it doesn't need to be one of the best at that too. It is hands down the best PVE BS and is one of the best ships in general to have in small scale PVP.

That aside, I do like the idea of a "hate" mod to actually give value to tanks.




Transversal affects missiles as well. I dont think that missiles should be boosted, but i dont think they should be nerfed either. Missiles dont even have the highest dps, far from it. But they hit for the same amount for every missile, with no wrecking and no misses. Thats why i like them, and i think a nerf is uncalled for.



well you stick some T2 torps in a raven, with target painters, and BLAMMO! you've got the hardest hitting, best tanking BS in the game... even to smaller ships, due to the target painters!

Boonaki
Caldari
Focused Annihilation
Detrimental Imperative
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:46:00 - [19]
 

I'd like to see fighter bays for pos's, and a clone vat for a pos.


Valea Silpha
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:52:00 - [20]
 

The problem with a 'hate' mod is that its open to severe abuse outside of fleet battles.

Assuming its a one slot module, regardless of which slot its in, it means that multiple ships can mount them and give an enemy ship no chance to ever really damage its aggressors. Example :

2x cruisers attack 1x bs.

BS starts firing on one of them. Gets it to half armor. Its gangmate then forces the BS to fire on it instead. Then when that cruiser gets hurt, they swap again. Nothing that can't instapop will be dead to even a couple of frigs and cruisers.

Even in fleet battles it removes some possibilities, because as long as their organisiation is working you could never 'snipe off the stragglers', and now as scorpians will be very well protected, everyone on both sides gets jammed and fleet battles become an ungainly scrabble for whoever still has the ability to fire failing to break the other guys tank.

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 11:58:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Brieve
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Hub Quantum
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Meridius
Originally by: Gierling

... frankly missilles need more supporting mods in general.



Frankly, missles need more counters in generalRazz If they had some counters, i would agree with the suggested modules.


I dont see the need for this. There are no counters to drones or turret ammo so why should there be for missiles? Dont say smartbombs because they cant destroy today's heavy drones very well.



There's a half dozen counters to turrets that do not apply to missiles and there is no equivalent for, such as transversal and things like getting inside optimal that a missile user doesn't even think about.

Drones have all of that as well (Drones consider transversal and optimal put your heavies on an interceptor if you don't believe it) AND they can be destroyed or left behind when you warp, not to mention they are their own worst enemy with dozens of bugs including a nasty bug that can get you concorded in high sec when they go off and randomly attack your gangmates.

Missiles do not need a boost, that's ridiculous. The raven excels in every aspect of the game except for fleet battles, it doesn't need to be one of the best at that too. It is hands down the best PVE BS and is one of the best ships in general to have in small scale PVP.

That aside, I do like the idea of a "hate" mod to actually give value to tanks.




Transversal affects missiles as well. I dont think that missiles should be boosted, but i dont think they should be nerfed either. Missiles dont even have the highest dps, far from it. But they hit for the same amount for every missile, with no wrecking and no misses. Thats why i like them, and i think a nerf is uncalled for.



well you stick some T2 torps in a raven, with target painters, and BLAMMO! you've got the hardest hitting, best tanking BS in the game... even to smaller ships, due to the target painters!


I hear the apoc is the best tanker in the game? How can the raven be the best, while also equipping target painters? I havent been in a battleship for a few years now (took a break from eve) but back then i could out-tank a Raven easy with a typhoon.

But back to the damage aspect of it. Im sure torpedoes hit for alot of damage, but those Fighter drones are pretty insane as well.

Lucian Corvinus
Gallente
Expert Systems
Posted - 2006.04.02 12:17:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Brieve

well you stick some T2 torps in a raven, with target painters, and BLAMMO! you've got the hardest hitting, best tanking BS in the game... even to smaller ships, due to the target painters!


sure, with target painters, you might overcome some of the problem with the sig radius, but to be able to overcome the explosion velocity you need a webber also, that leaves 3 med slots. OMG the wtfbbq1337 tank you can get thereRolling Eyes

cytomatrix
Caldari
Brutal Deliverance
Extreme Prejudice.
Posted - 2006.04.02 13:05:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Soyemia
Missiles are already overpowered, and defenders are a joke, they dont hit even heavy/torps.


I will agree when you manage to kill a Thorax in your Caracal with "overpowered" Heavy missiles. :)


Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
Posted - 2006.04.02 13:22:00 - [24]
 

"EW that redirects target lock" - bleh. I'd rather be able tomerge my shield bubble with something I'm escorting.

Missile defence...a decoy launcher.

Instead of a directly fired counter system like defenders, just give it a chance of absorbing missile hits on the ship which has fired it (Like the Starfire EDM, if that means anything to you) for a brief period.

The bigger the size of the decoy missile used, the bigger the chance that missiles would be countered by it. Only one at a time would be useful, and with say a 10 second duration the largest versions would either require 2 launchers dedicated to the missiles or have gaps in the coverage.

I was thinking...

Light 20%
Heavy 25%
Cruise 30%

(no rocket/torp option!)

With torpedos doing 1/2 damage even IF intercepted because of their blast area.

Either that or simply reduce the damage from every missile by that % if you want it less random, with a smaller effect on torps.

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 13:56:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Jim McGregor on 02/04/2006 13:56:24

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2006.04.02 13:57:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Maya Rkell
"EW that redirects target lock" - bleh. I'd rather be able tomerge my shield bubble with something I'm escorting.

Missile defence...a decoy launcher.

Instead of a directly fired counter system like defenders, just give it a chance of absorbing missile hits on the ship which has fired it (Like the Starfire EDM, if that means anything to you) for a brief period.

The bigger the size of the decoy missile used, the bigger the chance that missiles would be countered by it. Only one at a time would be useful, and with say a 10 second duration the largest versions would either require 2 launchers dedicated to the missiles or have gaps in the coverage.

I was thinking...

Light 20%
Heavy 25%
Cruise 30%

(no rocket/torp option!)

With torpedos doing 1/2 damage even IF intercepted because of their blast area.

Either that or simply reduce the damage from every missile by that % if you want it less random, with a smaller effect on torps.



So basicly cutting the damage of missile ships with 25% for no good reason? Ok, lets do that if we at the same time make 25% of the launched drones self-destruct for no good reason.

Maya Rkell
Third Grade Ergonomics
Posted - 2006.04.02 13:59:00 - [27]
 

Like, say...defenders are *supposed* to? Yea, that one.

Lucian Corvinus
Gallente
Expert Systems
Posted - 2006.04.02 17:36:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Maya Rkell
Like, say...defenders are *supposed* to? Yea, that one.


Hmmm.. could it be that you might have to train defenders past lvl 1 to actually do a difference??

I want a module shooting down hybrid ammo and projectile ammo Shocked

what we could really use is a short range high damage heavy missile, which the devs has been promising for over 6 months now but....... soon(tm) seems more like it.

Gierling
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2006.04.04 03:24:00 - [29]
 

WEll you'd need to figure it out so that someone using a Hate Mod, couldn't get one used on them.

OrangeAfroMan
Minmatar
AnTi.
Atrocitas
Posted - 2006.04.04 04:33:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Gierling
Falloff improvement modules, improves falloff and signature resolution as an alternative to tracking enhancers and tracking comps. A godsend to Blasters and autocannons (which both need luv), as well as another option to tracking comps.





That would be an absolute godsend along with changing the optimal to falloff range bonus for the Wolf and Jaguar, and they do need love :(

In fact, falloff module would make me never ever leave EvE.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only