Force Auxiliary Balance Proposal - Round 2

wormhole
null-sec
pvp

(Mingja) #21

Maybe they could fit into my Hangar then. They are SERIOUSLY oversized to the point where you just can’t see anything else but the Fax. Why do I have so little issues with my thanny, which fits into my hangar comfortably and allows me to see the thing in all it’s beauty, yet the fax doesn’t?

Can’t we at least get them to have the static super hangar too?

this is ■■■■. Really.


(Katarack Kitsumaru) #22

I think a more useful approach would start with something like this, followed by a method of limiting the volume 3200’s available to FAX pilots

  1. Introduce a system that gives diminishing returns to the effectiveness of every remote repairer applied to a target after a certain number.

  2. introduce some kind of signature radius modifier to remote repairers acting on undersized hulls. For capital reps it would look something like this
    BS=90%
    BC=80%
    Cruiser=70%
    destroyer= 60%
    frigate=50%

  3. Double material cost and build time of FAX’s


(John Fascia) #23

If the issue is over powered reps given to subcaps, why not make capital reps modules effectiveness be based on sig radius?


(Mashie Saldana) #24

So inject another fax alt for good measure. Message received loud and clear.


(Trottel Elf) #25

What are you basing your math on regarding the CEHE.
A normal dread has round about 150k Structure HP, the proposed CEHE makes it so you take 5% of any incoming dps, thus you can multiply your Structure HP by 20 to get EHP while CEHE’ing. That results in 3m EHP.
3m EHP is 2 DD’s or the Torp volley of 8 Supers.
Normally you’d use 2 DD’s on a dread anyways. Now you just use 3 to 100% gurantee the kill.
There will be many situations where this will be relevant, as it effectivly removes 1x dps of a dread 18 seconds earlier for each 3 Titans / 8 Supers on field.


(Manicsar) #26

You have to A. Kill Fax or B. Alpha the super. In the large battles of late killing faxes didnt work, granted in UALX Test/Goons might have cleared the fax stock pile of Tri/PL/SU enough and could have started killing Titans with guns but node crashed. So the strategy of late is just use 40 to 50 DDs to Alpha the titan and trade. In fact the winning strat is just dual tank Titans since they are really just DD platforms and gun damage isnt important.


(Drago Misharie) #27

Isn’t this aimed more at Rorquals than Faxes? And it seems a little shield nerfie.

I wouldn’t mind this as much if you balanced out the shield someway as compared to armor.

Maybe limiting the ancillary shield boosters wouldn’t be that bad if you boosted the shield buffers at the same time or some other balancing.

I think there will be unintended impacts to other capital ships.

It would be nice to see the stats for all the capital ships with these changes so we could sim fits.


(Brisc Rubal) #28

Agreed.

I’ve suggested that they reduce the insurance by treating the hulls like they’re T2. I also would like to see no CEHE, but I don’t know if that’s going too far.


(Brisc Rubal) #29

Why wouldn’t you do this anyway?


(Meeko Gloom) #30

It will likely be offlined


(Jackaryas) #31

Its not a perfect initial pass but i appreciate its not an easy balance. I said this in the first round and i think its still relevant - there are two main usages for FAX atm, supporting a super fleet and repping sub caps (usually when outnumbered).

Surely there should be two triage mods with different buffs/debuffs to fit these scenarios.

Fax blobs supporting supers suffer from having too much ehp and too much rep output.

Single active tank fax suffer from remote rep cycle time to save sub caps and capacitor warfare, nerfing the cycle time on shield triage is basically going to make it super hard to land reps on subs.


(Chance Ravinne) #32

This has come up over and over, but diminishing returns for reps doesn’t exist and possibly can’t exist. The way to implement diminishing returns for remote reps (any remote reps) is to make reps as “spiky” as possible. GREATLY increase the duration/cooldown, scaling up repair amount and cap usage as necessary. Make it so any repair based mistake is significantly more punishing, that failing to switch rep targets is a much larger window for punishment, all this makes scalability more and more difficult (instead of more powerful) the larger your N + X gets.


(Manicsar) #33

I missed the carrier triage age, what is the differences in tank and reps?


(Zyprexa) #34

Blockquote * Capital Ancillary Shield Boosters limited to 1 per ship (this does affect all capitals, not only FAX)

As if rorqs hadn’t been nerfed enough, you are going to make it easier to kill them which in turn slows down production which in turn causes problems to economy of Eve.

FFS “RAGE”


(zluq zabaa) #35

I have a counter-proposal.

My operating presumptions are pretty standard:

  • FAX are too stronk in remote and local rep sustainability
  • FAX shouldn’t replace sub-capital Logi
  • FAX should still be usable after tiercide
  • risk/reward/choice is good

Remote Reps:

  • increase duration 25% instead of 20%
  • Introduce Signature radius as a factor in remote reps, as I’ve suggested many times before
  • this is so that FAX are not the outright best choice to rep any ship as long as there is a cyno ready
  • other people have adopted this idea, but the numbers must be much lower. Basically a FAX should be the worst choice to rep a Frigate. And on ships with around 200-300 sig radius, Capital Remote Reps should still rep less than any Logistic Cruiser.
  • effective reps on a Frig should be 1% of theoretical reps; on BS maybe 15-20%

Emergency Hull Energizer

  • limit them to use on Dread and Carrier only
  • reduce duration on T1 25%, on T2 by 20%

CASB:

  • limit it to 1 on all ships, give Dreads the unique role of fitting more

Capacitor Boni:

  • keep the Boni
  • increase cycle time of Capital Capacitor Boosters by 100% (e.g. 24s on T2)

Triage Module:

  • Reduce Local Repair Duration bonus from 50% to 15% (on T2)
  • nerf Scan Resolution bonus by 50%
  • reduce Sensor Damp Resistance by 25%
  • reduce ECM resistance to 50% from 100%

Base Stats:

  • reduce their EHP by at least 25%
  • reduce some CPU here and there

and finally:

T2 Version:

  • introduce a T2 FAX with a projected Pricetag of 30-40 Bil that suffers all nerfs to modules (Triage, Cap Injectors, CASB etc.), but has the usual T2 advantages
    (not sure how serious I am with this one, but it seems nice to have a high-cost/high-risk/slightly higher reward option)

(Manicsar) #36

There is a limit to the amount of players who can just inject another fax and are willing to plex or pay for another account. Also it maybe easy to multi-box but there are limits there as well. Most alliances are pushing for max faxes as it is, I doubt we will see much of a bump in overall fax numbers after change. To Briscs point, if you could do it now you probably are.


(Zap Zempgara) #37

I like this proposal, the posted one doesn’t seem to go far enough to me.

Imho there needs to be some strong shake-up, not just “polishing of the turd” or number dialing - I’d like to see diminishing returns on reps for subcaps, or alternatively different modules for repping subs/caps, be that different triage or rep mods.

I’m a fan of the idea that FAXs should be t2 ships in particular. I’m sure there’s plenty of issues to work out with how to make this viable or how to transition to the new system, but still - imagine a seperate set of T2 FAXs at a higher pricetag than now (I was more thinking about the cost of JFs, if not a few bil less yet) with the rough capabilities of a FAX today, if not more yet to justify the cost. Current FAXes get the nerf-bat and become the capital equivalent of scythes and exequrors.
FAX always struck me as something that should have been T2 since the T2 ship hulls are supposed to be specialized vessels with unique abilities.


(Legal Affairs) #38

I think this still misses the mark. I don’t know what people are expecting here, you are not going to kill the capital blob. Period, full stop, the capital blob is here to stay. These ships are expensive, and logistically intensive as they were designed to be. The fact that putting a blob of the most expensive and massive ships in the game in one spot is going to make things “difficult to kill” is not a problem.

To address some of the more ridiculous concerns:
“FAX shouldn’t replace sub-capital logistics”
You let me know when you get a fax going 500+ m/s and I’ll agree with you

“The FAX is too strong”
It’s a several billion isk ship that does one thing. Are we going to complain about logistics cruiser next? These ships are literally designed to be n+1 fleet ships, and you’re not going to change that.

“Risk/reward is good”
FAX is ISK printer confirmed. ■■■■ off, these ships are expensive to acquire, and completely useless 99% of the time. For the several billion I spend on a fax, plus PLEX each month for a character that generates ZERO income it better be good at what it does.

The assumption that FAX owners are sitting on stacks of cash dropping faxes for their nano pvp garmur is just. ■■■■■■■. stupid. Each ship in this game has an area where it excels, and a FAX is no different. People getting pissed because their whaling fleet, which combined probably costs less than the cost of a single properly fit fax, can’t alpha the thing off the field is stupid. CCP needs to recognize the proponents of these changes as the self-serving shills they are and hold fast on the current FAX meta, which is fine.

P.S Injecting FAX #3 now. You’re 20% reduction just turned into a 20% increase. Can’t wait until the next blob fight or rorqual save. :fu:


(Grayclay) #39

I appreciate the side of the conversation you are bringing to this thread. I think you have valid points, though there is somewhere inbetween “FAXes are fine” vs. “Delete FAX” that I think we can achieve.

Should a 20 man gang in T1 cruisers be able to out DPS a capital sized logistics boat? No, probably not.

Should every capital engagement result in blanketing the world with FAXes prioritized over everything else for their magical healing powers? No, probably not.

That said, your point regarding N+1 ships is a good one. I’m not sure what meta-calls and strategy people in this thread are hoping FAX nerfs achieve. The game is always going to be a numbers game, so I assume people want fights that are more dynamic than “whose logistics dies first”.


(Lord Molly) #40

Cant agree enough with jack on this. Good nerf for overall usage of fax, but surely these bonuses can easilly be split up. Nerf their ability to rep caps and supers titans etc, but provide a better rr platform for subcapital support, in the form of shorter cycle times when repping non capital ships.

Otherwise, you just force the massive nul blocks to drop another 20 fax, which is more than feasable in most cases, and almost totally remove the ability for a smaller higher skilled force to fight outnumbered.