Hole rolling has changed since I returned to the game a few months ago. I used to have to triple plate an MWD Abaddon. I’m not entirely up to speed on some of these newer modules. Not even sure how old they are. And again - this is the kind of reasonable objection I’ve been trying to find.
However, simple modifying the Higgs Anchor I specs to provide a 50MN MWD’s sig bloom to remove the need for a 500 is a very simple tweak that CCP can make by changing one varible.
My poor sweet rail guns =/ lol
Oh Archer… Just look me up in the client and maybe do some counting… I’ve played for almost half as long as EVE has been around. Do stop sir… it’s become a very very bad habit. Check the facts before you post. For the love of all that is true and correct in this world just do your homework man!
Ok yeah, you’ve got something here - and this is a case where I’d argue to what I mentioned to Archers response. I would - in view of what the Higgs Anchor is - just modify that module to give a 50MN MWD the sig boost that you’d get with the 500MN - that way you don’t have the odd module problem. Makes perfect sense, doesn’t break the game, and gives you a whole let less a reason to think you don’t need a whole fit. Now you may want to just make a hole rolling thorax fleet that could fight and role the hole at the same time! =) There’s a new, beneficial, game play enhancing meta that’s generated by this idea!
And it couldn’t have been thought of with out your incredible insight! This is the kind of atmosphere I’d like to generate here. This is the kind of golden nugget I’ve been searching for! Thank you!
And then you mess with Higgs fitted mining barges, who might suffer for having all that additional mass when they’re using the Higgs anchor to vastly reduce their max speed so they can stay aligned at 75% for instant warping and still maintain 15km range on their rock until their ore hold is full.
You quite likely stop them from traversing WH connections into shattered wormholes to mine ice, for example, and mess with an afterburner they may have fit so they can change range when their local asteroids are tapped out.
Every change has more consequences, and “fixing” the Higgs to fix rollers breaks other stuff. All for a fitting paradigm redesign that takes away oddball fits and doesn’t add anything particularly good or solve a problem in return.
Just for fun, I encourage everyone to post good metas that get ■■■■■■ because of OP’s proposal and see how he will refuse to consider them while still insisting his idea is good:
Who are you to decide what I can and cannot fit? You’re not “helping” me by limiting my options.
Right now, here on Earth, the IT and Engineering world are moving toward interfacing systems that can pool together their resources (computational and otherwise) as much as possible instead of segmenting them, since segmentation leads to overutilization (not possible in EVE) and underutilization of the various systems in use. These systems are described as scalable (and elastic). What you’re proposing is going in the opposite direction. Excluding “redundancy” and “concurrency” and “single point of failure” from consideration since they do not apply to this context, a single system with a large pool of shared resources is strictly superior to several systems with dedicated resources that cannot be shared.
Not to mention is just outright removes any prospect of finding ingenious, oddball fits in the future.
Honesty the best argument against this idea is that it’s boring. It takes away a great degree of freedom and replaces it with a small-percentage min-max system that’ll favour extremely cookie-cutter builds with a high barrier to entry in terms of cost, because the popular mutaplasmids will be very expensive.
The fact that it’s boring is enough, in my opinion.
the idea of using mutaplasmids on ship hulls is a separate issue (do note that its so bad that no one even wants to touch it) and is not worth mentioning when the core “ship fitting” idea in this thread is just as bad if not worse.
ok, so You’ve met certain number of individuals that struggled with “fitting for a purpose”, how does it make You justified to speak of behalf of millions of other players without their consent?
Please note that you didn’t say in quoted post that “alot of people can attest”. You have said “any pilot in any walk of life in EVE” which means everyone everywhere in the game.
And I will have You know, I have never been frustrated with trying to fit a ship for specific purpose, however wild and silly that purpose was. And I’d appreciate if You didn’t speak on my behalf on that subject. (To close off the loop now You’e also been told to not speak on behalf of someone specific :P)
Now that is a very interesting little nuggest of information. I’m very very not familiar with the ins and outs of mining - cool observation.
Your toon was born in 2013. Human nature being what it is I simply don’t believe this statement. Not at that length of time in eve.
Or just redefines what an ingenious oddball fit is.
alts dude… alts… you really think thats his/her first character??? doubtful…
This really remains to be seen, because when and if an experiment like this does come out, CCP can adjust the amount of mutaplasmids dropped per instance to aid newer players in an economic sense to upgrade their ships.
Right now a T1 frig fit up tends to be between about 6.5 mil and 10 mil. With mutaplasmids I’m thinking 8-12 mil is about what we’d see. It’s not a pirate hull, and it’s not a T2 hull. No need for it to run more than the Navy faction frigs around 13-16mil on the market.
Once the cost issues resolve through market behavior, then we’ll see what meta’s emerge. They may end up cutting very different shaped cookies from what you imagine - and there is nothing that says module balances can’t be made. They get made all of the time. It’s not a sunk idea - it’s just going to redefine the way ship fitting theory functions which admittedly you’re opposed to.
But lets suppose we didn’t use separate grids and just allowed a 15% buff with mutaplasmids? That doesn’t OP the hull, gives you all the play room you like the way you like it (apparently?), helps younger pilots get meta4 gear on their ship, and helps polish meta’s for older pilots that have already established, by giving them a little buff for having trained that long and hard. The amount of times a T2 afterburner would have made all the difference tended to be the times the module just couldn’t be used with out sacrificing everything else. It’s not an afterburner in all cases but a common example. Having to pay 4 mil for that option is a little irritating, but it beats and option like a 50mil implant.
What would you say there? Because if local grids are the only concern i could be persuaded to make it a global buff on the hull. Some of the math I’ve done just between the Atron and the Condor on the scram-kiting meta alone indicates that while the idea can function, when I get to the slasher it may be harder to sell. I don’t know anything about how an executioner flies in terms of fit, but presumibly there are similarities between all the hulls. The sad part here is that a “meta” in an of itself pertains to a style of game play, and isn’t strictly married to a hull. It’s a fuzzy distinction though, because you end up with a harder and harder time with some meta’s as they scale one way or the other, and that’s one of the bigger challenges with the idea. But it might actually do something good for the game in saying “scram kite meta only functions with small modules”. But it does leave the question, how to larger hulls like the Orthrus, Proteus, or Lachesis get fielded and do we consider these issues to be dynamically askew in the performance curves of existing meta’s to which they correspond; is the deviation acceptable? Does the meta the hull currently speaks to preclude the desire to fly the same meta elsewhere in it’s scale? That’s what this kind of PG/CPU management system would address. It would either preserve meta and scale it when it’s balancing passes have finished tweaking things, or simply dictate that meta and hull size/role bonus are married.
What I wonder is, in terms of game play and player experience, is this bad? I see both sides, but I’m only sold on a global PG/CPU if CCP thinks that in terms of mutaplasmid availability (trig participation) and ease of implementation that it’s just easier to do. To address the challenge would entail a formidable amount of spreadsheet shenanigans - believe me I’m already there lol - but that’s par for the course with anything CCP does in changing the build. So if you’re existing meta’s and ability to stumble into new oddball stuff thats useful is preserved, can you handle it? What would you do if CCP said it’s just time to box in certain meta’s? That’s kind of the never ending effect of tiericide anyhow.
I don’t really think I’d like to give up on the idea as a whole, but some modification is to be expected and therefore acceptable. So the question is, if you get that concession, is it still more than you can bear? Or does it provide a compelling new dimension to the game for people who need to spread out the cost to buff PG/CPU? If you’ve got LP for an implant and it applies to any hull, would it be fair to spend 4 mil on mutaplasmids to get 15% more that’s hull specific?
Think it through. I’ve done a lot of math, and so far just the Atron and Condor would make it with a modification of about 15-20%. The problem as I see it, is to preserve existing meta’s with local grids, you’re more to the 20% and less to the 15% and that’s where things, meta or not are going to start stepping on T2 hulls in terms of ability. I don’t fly T2 or T3 often because it’s pretty pricey. We all need performance from our hulls though, so how do we find just a little something to get a competitive edge with out breaking the bank?
A 12 mil atron VS a 25-35 mil aries is a steep rise, and a big isk efficiency hit for a newer player as you learn about engagement and manual piloting. Making things easier for newer people, and rewarding older people for their investment by allowing minor largely self directed buffs would is what I’m advocating for.
Not limiting this to PG/CPU - what if you wanted to spend it differently. Perhaps fill the explosive hole in the armor profile with a built in 15%? It’s the only modification I’d make on an Incursus. I’d brawl that thing all the time because a take over tackle brawler like that might survive the escalation. Again, hull economy in mind here, and a better performing hull that you can handle losing if it doesn’t come clean in the wash is where I’m aiming. If you’re gonna rumble, you’ve gotta anti up, but honestly, a roll of nickles in a boxing glove is a $5.00 investment almost anyone would deem economically worth trying in view of what it does =)
4 mil… probably worth a little grinding missions or something for a new guy, easy for an old guy, and you can easily opt out =) no ones gonna force you not to fill the explosive hole on your armor boat if you don’t want to.
I’m confident you’re correct, but if they aren’t gonna step up on their combat toon and put a little legitimacy to the banter I just roll with what they bring. This is my main, and I don’t care if my kill board isn’t perfect, it is honest. =) And of course a kill board doesn’t strictly speaking tell the story of how a person succeeds, only what fails. The abstract contains an alarming amount of data to ponder. Looking at my kill board you’d never be able to tell what I excel at and what i don’t. You’d only see what I’ve been up to in terms of chasing the meta =)
It’s not just combat toons that fit ships. It’s not only combat toons and combat fits that are screwed up by your proposal. Nobody has to present their credentials to you to have a legitimate opinion. There’s no zkill gatekeeper to answer to here.
Nope, sorry.
And you still haven’t addressed the fits you break. Again you are just trying to attack people’s right to state their objections and/or shame them and run off on tangents about fitting T1 frigates that doesn’t counter a single point made against your idea.
Nobody cares about the “math you’ve done” because it’s irrelevant to how your idea is a bad one.
You may believe or refuse to believe anything you mean - I have never had feeling of frustraion when fitting a ship for a purpose during my 13 year adventure with eve. Why? because I have learned the system early, learned it boundaries and I play with blocks and restrictions in hand when I make my fits.
Can I fit in that mod over there in this fit? yes? nice! no? well can I do anything about it? (skills, implants) yes? nice! no? well let’s look for something benefitial for the purpose I can still squish in. Or maybe I need to use easier on fitting version of something else instead? No frustration just straight creative process. It’s all about the approach I suppose.
it is in fact my second character in eve. First one is only 1 month older and was primarily used for me to gain basic gropes for 54 days or something to figure out how I will be earning my isks for plex. After a month of playing, with help of same friend I’ve started this guy to stay for real. For all intent and purposes it has remained my main for years, and while recently I have decided to abandon idea of “main” and have separate characters for specific purpose.
I have alot of younger alts tho 
I made a few as well to explore the different aspects - market, industry, and such.
I’ve discovered a market toon, and this one is about all I really want to engage in. Beyond that I think my interest level in the other facets of the game provide a lot of of time consumption in a way similar to work and not leisure which is why I came - to enjoy some fun in a spaceship. Not dogging on the other styles of play, but I prefer the competitive PVP atmosphere of most MMORPG’s than their more PVE style of game play. But sometimes you just need a cyno. We’ve all been there, and I’m sooooooooo glad to finally be out of that stupid carrier. o0 If you want it from jita, get it yourself! lol
I see your statement, but I reserve the right to be suspicious =) I’m going to leave this one there.