I promise you, they will be used primarily on T2 modules. Its the best bang for your buck, and you can soak far more “crapped” mutations that way.
… T2 is currently the most bang for your buck and yes they will be the primary ones used however depending on the rarity of the plasmids you may see faction mods rise not fall.
i know i can afforded a few rolls on a CN disruptor. unless the plasmids cost as much as the CN disruptor
1 Like
I addressed this earlier.
Hopefully barring Trig pockets as isk/T3 mat faucets, that leaves plasmids and BPs as rewards.
Ergo, they are not going to be rare.
As to filament availability, EVE is crawling with explorers.
we went over this plasmids may not be rare but there is a large variety of them. just for armor you have small med large then you have small med and large for the ancillary
Which can be applied to T2 modules, as I stated above.
that’s a different argument…
i’m saying while plasmids will be plentiful the specific plasmid you want may not be
You are joking right? Hacking is an active mechanism since odyssey expansion.
No, I can’t throw ISK at the problem of success chance on looting overseer wreck.
yet there is still RNG
BUT YOU CAN FOR BETTER HIT ROLLS
These are the people who thought it was a good idea to nerf carrier DPS because they were making too much money in PvE. In other words, carriers were fine in PvP, they were fine in DPS, they were fine in all aspects, but THEY HAD TO BE NERFED IN ALL THOSE ASPECTS because they made too much money in PvE. So, don’t fix the PvE aspect of the carriers, don’t entertain any other rational solutions to the problem, like, i dunno… make it so they just can’t enter these PvE sites, make capship PvE sites which are more difficult than subcap sites, etc. - NO! THAT MAKES TOO MUCH SENSE! THAT WOULD BE TOO EASY! JUST NERF CARRIER DPS!
Lazy, stupid, moronic balancing.
Inb4 “just another guy who wanted to abuse the broken ISK-machine which was the carrier.” To the moron tempted to write this, I am on record time and time again (including now) that I was and am perfectly fine with even a drastic solution such as “carriers no longer allowed in PvE sites, and we aren’t even going to make capship sites as recompense,” and I will also state that I have never owned any kind of capship. I JUST HATE MORONIC BALANCING DECISIONS.
I unsubbed for about 1 year after the carrier debacle, and wasn’t seen on these forums the entire time, nor did I ever login to the game during that time. I was just getting ready to sub again today, but will now hold off. If any of these retarded balancing ideas come to pass, I’ll stay unsubbed, maybe for good. And no - nobody can ‘has my stuffs.’
1 Like
Doesnt matter.
The market will provide them.
Unless CCP fks with the chance of whatever plasmid, they will be no less “rare” than any other.
Think of it this way.
Ignore for a second that they are plasmids of a certain type, and think of them instead as an actual T2 module drop of that type.
See what I mean?
They are no more “rare” than any other plasmid, and T2 modules to apply them to are in abundance.
CCP balance as if they were trying to eat noodles with chopsticks through a letter box
1 Like
Why?
Why?
So…won’t the demand for T2 rise up to the point where players become indifferent between using T2 and Faction/DED modules?
T2 prices have been in steady decline for years. So is giving that market a boost a bad thing? Honest question. And full disclosure I have a number of alts that can do T2 invention.
Yeah I don’t think it will be that simple. Sov NS is not one homogeneous group. Ascribing to a large number of players behavior as if they were a single person is completely fallacious thinking.
That is often Salvos modus operandi. 
As someone who does T2 invention yes this is true. Invention centers around RNG.
1 Like
And I wish I had a nickel for every time someone claimed “this” will kill the game.
well no… to be fair they didn’t work in pve then either unless you were up against morons. a single griffin locks down a carrier
Agreed. I thought that was a mistake. My preference was to temporarily nerf carriers and supers from throwing off the money supply and fix how carrier/super ratting was done. Maybe prohibit them form standard anomalies and give them their own or the like.
Agreed.
Not sure why you would do this. I’ve been following the thread and it seems like there is alot of over the top rhetoric in terms of how this will effect the game. Not sure I agree, but hey maybe I’m wrong.
Well just to be clear, I’m talking about stuff like unthinkingly nerfing base stats of modules for absolutely no other reason than just to make these RNG modules fit into the game. That’s the kind of ‘balance’ cough I object to, just as with the carrier nerf. In fact it isn’t balancing anything. It’s unbalancing stuff.
People who will unthinkingly and reflexively nerf a carrier because too much money is made in PvE, and people who will nerf base stats of modules just to be able to squeeze these RNG modules into the game, will do anything. You might as well have a bunch of chimpanzees balancing the game by throwing darts at a dartboard.
These people can’t be trusted.
Ouuuuh, so that’s why a t2 long point costs 1.5 million instead of 1 and a large t2 trimark cost 150 million instead of 33 million.
In that case 1.5 million < 1 million and 150 million is less than 33 million. I think, I got you now.
Yes, prices have gone up with the change to moon mining, but overall, prices have been in decline if you look further back.
Have anybody considered impact on solo PvP it will have, and unpredactibility of encounter in future? I think it will (CCP) Rise. 
1 Like
if the price between T2 and faction/DED became close nobody will use T2, because why? It’s about stats to the price ratio. Only problem is modules higher than T2 have much lower supply than T2. If mutated T2 become new faction/DED we will have serious economy/gameplay problem. Why doing explo sites when everything I want is items from new instances?
Market pressure will create demand for T2 for sure (mutagens).