Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lyn Farel]

OMG GNOSIS.

When I think I proposed 2 very similarly oriented design for the DeviantArt contest...

[Alain Colcer]

we need SoE, Mordu's, Syndicate and Mandate ships too 

[orange]

Mordu's Blackbird 

[Alain Colcer]

A Mordu's BlackBird
A Syndicate Celestis
An Ammatar unique design with Matari Speed and Amarr lasers (but without much armor)
A SoE unique exploration-centric cruiser (SoCT should cover reconnaissance and scouting)
A Thukker unique design
A Khanid unique design

And of course a Concord issue shuttle.

[Esna Pitoojee]

A Khanid unique design

Torpaddon plx.

[Lyn Farel]

An Ammatar unique design with Matari Speed and Amarr lasers (but without much armor)

Scorch Vagalazor plx.

[Mithfindel]

A Khanid unique design

Torpaddon plx.

If and when CCP looks if T2 ships are in "appropriate" corps, I'd expect the Purifier and Anathema swapped around (making the Stealth Bomber a Khanid design). I've been known to be wrong on my wild mass guessing and delirious musings, though. Wouldn't mind the Inquisitor (it's still a missile boat, right?) to be retconned to be a Khanid design. IIRC there was at one point a Khanid patrol frigate (or something similarly-named) in the DB, using the Cruor model (but naturally with Khanid textures).

[Nicoletta Mithra]

Inquisitor is a repair frigate, now

[Lyn Farel]

IIRC there was at one point a Khanid patrol frigate (or something similarly-named) in the DB, using the Cruor model (but naturally with Khanid textures).

Khanid black cruors are still patroling around Khanid stargates iirc.

[hellgremlin]

The Gnosis bonuses o.o Basically no reason to fly anything else if that goes through as-is.

25% bonus to all medium guns, HMs and HAMS, 37.5% increase to scan probe strength. Battlecruiser level ehp and fitting. Well then :l

That thing better be hard as fuck to get hold of.

There was a time when CCP was stupidly naive enough to think that 'the immense costs of making Titans' was going to keep their numbers low. Have a look at null-sec today.

50m3 Drone bandwith, 75m3 bay. so a light and medium team, or any combo that fits.

4000 HP hull, armor and shields, equal resists across the board for hull, armor and shields. Equal bonuses for any weapons and 5 turrets and 5 launchers on a 6/6/6 configuration means you can fit it however the hell you want and still have maximum effect on any setups, 3 rig slots.

Basically, if this thing goes live as-is, there will only be a question of time until the null-powers don't fly anything else below capitals, and then shortly after that, you find them all over the rest of EVE and anyone who DON'T fly them is an idiot waiting to get killed.

*THIS* is the I-Win button that has not existed until now. *THIS* is the kind of idea that will, without a doubt, kill EVE.

AND I LOVE EVERY SINGLE MOLECULE OF IT. NNNNNGGGGHHHHH. NNNGGHHHH! NNGGHHH!

[kalaratiri]

A few more little things (or not so little): https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2495573#post2495573

CCP Fozzie

Hey all. Quick related update now that I'm finished some backend refactoring work that opened up those 'options' I was so cryptic about earlier:

We have also refactored the methods used to limit older modules to certain ships. Most of the ships changed by this will simply have a more clear description (Can fit module X rather than -99% CPU to module X) but there are two gameplay improvements this change allowed us to make:

Change the CPU requirements of Covops cloaks to 100 and change the bonus on coverts, recons and blockade runners to "-20% CPU needed for cloaks per level". This means that cloaks will use the same CPU at level 5 (0) but the CPU use at lower levels is less crippling, making the use of these ships at less than level 4-5 more viable.

Open up the use of Covert Cynosural Field Generators on any Strategic Cruiser that has the Covert Reconfiguration subsystem fitted, as well as on Blockade Runners. This means that the availability of covert cynos is consistent and simple. If you can jump through the bridge you can light the cyno.

• As a more neutral side effect that is still worth noting: the Combat and Attack Battlecruisers, as well as the Blockade Runners and Deep Space Transports, will now be in separate groups. This means anyone with custom overviews will need to add the new Attack Battlecruiser group and the new Blockade Runner group to their list of groups that show up on the overview. The default overviews will be adjusted automatically.

Some of you may also find this interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DMCbkJ_NkS0

[kalaratiri]

Armour Tanking 2.0: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2496241#post2496241

Is my title pretentious enough?

We've got the resources all properly committed so I'm now ready to share with you all our initial plan to fix some of the biggest problems that face armor tanking in this game. Sorry for the extended period of teasing, hopefully the happy ending will make it all worthwhile.

I was going to go into this big spiel about all the problems with armor tanking in general and active armor tanking in particular, but you all know this so I'll jump straight to the interesting bits.

Here's what we're looking for feedback on:

Armor Rigs

• New rig called the Nanobot Overcharger that increased the overheat bonus on your local armor reps by 30% (40% for T2). So with one of the T1 rigs overheating gives the rep 13% more rep amount and 19.5% faster rate of fire instead of the default 10% and 15% respectively. This effect is stacking penalized and gives no bonus when the reps are not overheated. Same calibration and build costs as a Aux Nano or Nanobot Acc rig.
• Change the penalty on all active armor rigs (Aux Nano Pump, Nanobot Accelerator, and the new Nanobot Overcharger) to increase the powergrid use of local armor reps by 10% instead of reducing ship velocity.

Plates

• Add a new skill to the game called Armor Upgrades. This skill reduces the mass penalty of all armor plates by 5% per level. (Int/Mem, rank 3, requires Mechanics 3) This skill affects all plates and is unconnected to the stat change listed below.
• Reduce the base mass penalty on all 800mm, 200mm and 50mm plates by 20%

Ancillary Armor Repairer

• Not the same mechanic as the ASB, please read to the end.
• Always uses the same cap as a normal (T1/T2/Named) Armor Repper
• When not loaded with a cap booster, has 3/4 the rep amount as a T1 Armor Repairer
• Loaded cap boosters triple rep amount (so reps 2.25x a T1 repairer when loaded)
• Same cycle time as T1 reps
• Same capacity, charge restrictions and reload time as an ASB, but the longer cycle time of armor reps means it goes longer between reloads
• Limited to one per ship

Quick Q&A about the AAR:

Why limited to one per ship?

The longer time between reloads is a big part of the playstyle we wanted to give the AAR, but that with multiple copies would completely negate the burst tanking ideal. In addition, there is more of a tradition of lowslot tanking modules restricted to one per ship so I made the call that in this case the restriction would be worthwhile. The ASB debate is a separate issue unconnected. Please note that nothing is preventing current dual or triple rep fits from swapping one of their reps into an AAR.

Why keep the cap use consistent?

The elimination of cap consumption when loaded is a huge advantage of ASBs, but we decided with the AAR to build the strengths in another direction, focusing on greater stability instead. In addition, one downside of the ASB's zero cap use is the inability of one player to influence the tank of another through neuts. This works ok for the ASB but I am not inclined to expand that mechanic further.
Why not just buff all armor reps?

One of the aspects I really like about the ASB is that it allowed CCP to decouple burst tanking from sustained tanking in a new and interesting way. Burst tanking is key for most PVP active tank scenarios while sustained tanking is more common for PVE. We wanted to carry that aspect over to armor tanking, allowing us to create new burst tanking gameplay without making current sustained tanking gameplay overpowered.


So we are very interested in hearing your feedback on this proposal. Expect at least most of these changes to make it into the next Sisi build for playtesting (the AARs might not catch this upcoming build but they should at least be in the one after that).

[Lyn Farel]

So, if I understand correctly, an ASB tanks not a lot more than a standard shield booster but uses no cap until it gets out of boosters. An AAR tanks twice more than a standard armor rep but uses cap.

Am I right ?

Also, I dont understand that part : "In addition, one downside of the ASB's zero cap use is the inability of one player to influence the tank of another through neuts. "

Isnt that an upside actually, not to be sensitive to neuts ?

[Katrina Oniseki]

So, if I understand correctly, an ASB tanks not a lot more than a standard shield booster but uses no cap until it gets out of boosters. An AAR tanks twice more than a standard armor rep but uses cap.

Am I right ?

Also, I dont understand that part : "In addition, one downside of the ASB's zero cap use is the inability of one player to influence the tank of another through neuts. "

Isnt that an upside actually, not to be sensitive to neuts ?

For the user yes, not for game balance. At least according to the complainers and CCP.

[Lyn Farel]

At last.