Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Has anyone proposed ancillary prop mods?

Author
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2017-01-10 07:15:07 UTC
I'm curious, as the title suggests, whether ancillary propulsion modules have been discussed? It seems to be a logic addition to the line up. Runs off caps boosters just like shields and then aggressively attacking the capacitor when those are depleted.

Thoughts? Comments?
#2 - 2017-01-10 08:01:45 UTC
these would be broken and a good chance they would force the meta into a brawling one
The-Culture
#3 - 2017-01-10 13:27:00 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
these would be broken and a good chance they would force the meta into a brawling one

Cool, lets do that Big smile
Prelium Ultima
#4 - 2017-01-10 13:57:39 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
these would be broken and a good chance they would force the meta into a brawling one

Cool, lets do that Big smile


There should be more reward for putting your asse(ts) more at risk.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2017-01-10 14:28:54 UTC
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
these would be broken and a good chance they would force the meta into a brawling one

Cool, lets do that Big smile


There should be more reward for putting your asse(ts) more at risk.



Technically there is but the reward is not valued highly by most PvPers. Brawling range mean higher DPS build for example but range control always beat that because it's see as more efficient to slowly kill the enemy from out of his range than risk it to burn him down faster. For all the "Kiting nano-***" comment we can see from time to time, it all happen because it's efficient. People take fights on their terms as much as they can and one where you control range is better than one where you don't. It's easyer to save your ship if you are the one dictating the range.
Prelium Ultima
#6 - 2017-01-10 17:11:30 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
these would be broken and a good chance they would force the meta into a brawling one

Cool, lets do that Big smile


There should be more reward for putting your asse(ts) more at risk.



Technically there is but the reward is not valued highly by most PvPers. Brawling range mean higher DPS build for example but range control always beat that because it's see as more efficient to slowly kill the enemy from out of his range than risk it to burn him down faster. For all the "Kiting nano-***" comment we can see from time to time, it all happen because it's efficient. People take fights on their terms as much as they can and one where you control range is better than one where you don't. It's easyer to save your ship if you are the one dictating the range.



Yes, perhaps the "reward" is not quite enough on current settings? Are brawling hulls at a significant disadvantage and would the Op be an interesting addition to the mix?

All of this is situational of course.

"Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2017-01-10 17:24:21 UTC
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
these would be broken and a good chance they would force the meta into a brawling one

Cool, lets do that Big smile


There should be more reward for putting your asse(ts) more at risk.



Technically there is but the reward is not valued highly by most PvPers. Brawling range mean higher DPS build for example but range control always beat that because it's see as more efficient to slowly kill the enemy from out of his range than risk it to burn him down faster. For all the "Kiting nano-***" comment we can see from time to time, it all happen because it's efficient. People take fights on their terms as much as they can and one where you control range is better than one where you don't. It's easyer to save your ship if you are the one dictating the range.



Yes, perhaps the "reward" is not quite enough on current settings? Are brawling hulls at a significant disadvantage and would the Op be an interesting addition to the mix?

All of this is situational of course.


The problem is how hard a meta can shift. If you make brawler able to dictate range by keeping people in brawl range more reliably, then kiters will really begin to feel the pressure. The point where you balance it is hard to find and achieve.
#8 - 2017-01-10 23:38:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Rawketsled
500mn Ancil MWD.

  • 60 second cycle time (don't confuse this with reload timer).
  • Can't warp while module active.
  • Immune to the effects of scrams.
  • No mass addition.
  • Can only be fit to BS sized hulls.

I just want to see BS's motor about like nobody's business.
Badfellas Inc.
#9 - 2017-01-11 01:56:08 UTC
i can see some intresting things develop with this too.

500mn mwd
112m3 capacity

if used with 400's, 400% speed bonus with up to 9 cycles
If used with 800's, 800% speed bonus with up to 4 cycles

50% overheat bonus

#10 - 2017-01-11 02:08:24 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
i can see some intresting things develop with this too.

500mn mwd
112m3 capacity

if used with 400's, 400% speed bonus with up to 9 cycles
If used with 800's, 800% speed bonus with up to 4 cycles

50% overheat bonus


Oooh, that's a neat one.
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2017-01-11 19:54:02 UTC
Rawketsled wrote:
500mn Ancil MWD.

  • 60 second cycle time (don't confuse this with reload timer).
  • Can't warp while module active.
  • Immune to the effects of scrams.
  • No mass addition.
  • Can only be fit to BS sized hulls.

I just want to see BS's motor about like nobody's business.


I like these except the immune to scrams part.
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2017-01-11 20:00:36 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
i can see some intresting things develop with this too.

500mn mwd
112m3 capacity

if used with 400's, 400% speed bonus with up to 9 cycles
If used with 800's, 800% speed bonus with up to 4 cycles

50% overheat bonus



I was thinking very similarly, only difference being the size of the charge dictates the active duration of the module with no change to speed, all charges rendering say 500% bonus, or something.

OR,

The opposite. The size of the charge dictates the speed bonus but the duration is the same for all charges.

Again, I agree, I think BS and capitals would benefit the most from this. Smaller super agile and cap stable ship probably wouldn't.
Caldari State
#13 - 2017-01-11 22:43:45 UTC
An interesting concept. Sans scram immunity. That's just too OP.

I think rather than the speed being dictated by the size of the charge, the cycle time should be inversely related to the size of the charge... or the sig bloom.

For example, a 50 should have a cycle time of.... whatever... 30 seconds. Where an 800 should have a cycle time of say 5 seconds.

Or in the case of sig bloom, a 50 offers a standard sig bloom, where an 800 offers a substantially reduced sig bloom.

The use-cases for each are simple. Either you need to be able to kite a bunch, or you need to make sure that your sig radius isn't the size of a planet when the torpedos/whatevers are flying at you.

Users of said anci props would then be able to decide whether they want the nice cheap efficient one, or a short (but expensive) burst to avoid the sig bloom while they're fighting.

I think it would definitely need to be a BS and above module, with minimum sizes. For example, 50s are too small for a BS, 400s are too small for a capital.

Then there's the question of whether neuting ships would be too nerfed by it.. or whether it's a good counter, or whether it's just flat out irrelevant.
Forum Jump