Universal Tech 3 Modules able to be fit on Low Mid and High Slots

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

Hello folks! o7

These are some ideas for new types of modules, for example Tech III modules, with special capabilities. They are probably a potential danger to balance, or will at least require careful tweaking. I still find the idea promising, so here it goes.

The modules specifics are just suggestions. I am not claiming to be any good in module mechanics or balance suggestions.

Universal Modules (Tech III)

Modules that can be placed in every type of slot (low, mid or high), changing their attributes and energy usage depending on which type of slots they occupy. They can be active or passive modules.

For example, when the Universal Stasis Webifier is put in a Mid Slot, it would lower enemy speed at a much higher percent than regular webs, but it may have reduced range, or vice versa - greater range but lesser velocity factor. Could be good if both variants are present.

When put in a High Slot, it would be able to web like a stasis tower in a defined radius (probably not allowed in high sec), but there may be a percent of chance to succeed in webbing. The chance should be applied at the beginning of each cycle of the module. And its energy usage should be rather high.

When put in a Low Slot, this webber should turn into an active anti-web module and it would reduce the the enemy Stasis Webifier velocity factor significantly as well as the chance to be webbed by the High Slot variation of the same module. Possible drawbacks may be reduced agility and scan resolution (or reduced max locked target count).

Another example - when the Universal Afterburner module is put on a High Slot, it would provide much greater velocity boost and it may be somewhat resistant to webifying - percent of chance per webifier cycle. Its energy usage should be high.

When put in a MId Slot it would increase speed as usual, but also provide better agility and increased signature radius, or vice versa significantly lower agility and reduced signature radius. Different variants with different bonuses and drawbacks combinations would be good to have.

When put on a Low Slot, it would actively increase agility and significantly reduce signature radius at the expense of scan resolution. Or maybe some other combination - it would increase agility and increase signature radius significantly, but the ship scan resolution should be OK. And maybe it would passively or actively increase warp speed. This last bonus may be applied on some separate Universal Afterburner module variation or added to the ones described above.

Only one Universal Module of each type should be able to be fit on a ship, OR they should have high fitting requirements, limiting their usage.

What do you think? :slight_smile:

Suggestions about other types of Universal Modules are most welcome.

2

I would probably do something like put the web module in all my slots and troll my own fleet lol.

It seems ambiguous but :man_shrugging:

1 Like
3

Hehehe! I guess you can do so… This is why I mentioned these modules use should be restricted to one per type on a ship or maybe they should have high fitting requirements. :slight_smile:

4

Not a bad idea, although the example is kind of terrible. I’d make T3 modules have the same effects, but the stats change depending on where they’re equipped, which sounds like scripts.

5

Yeah, the examples are just to show the overall concept. Well, maybe the High Slot variation of the Universal Stasis Web is the worst of them, since it is not certain of how that thing would cycle if it can lock and web 7 targets… Maybe it should webify all the ships in a certain radius, pretty much like a stasis tower.

Will try to think of better examples, will see…

6

I edited the example of the Universal Webifier module in the OP.

I remember reading something about Tech 3 modules in the last CSM minutes.

I wonder if you guys at CCP are thinking of modules similar to these in this topic or is it something else?

@CCP_Fozzie @CCP_Larrikin what do you think of these? Or is it too early to talk about Tech 3 modules? :slight_smile:

7

For uh, what reason? I get that it would be cool to be able to hyper-customize your module layouts like this but I don’t see it adding a lot over the modules as they are. Webs that change range and effectiveness? That’s a stasis grappler. Your high slot afterburner sounds suspiciously like a MWD, and I don’t see a situation where I’m looking to balance 3 different buffs to 3 different ship stats versus fitting a dedicated module for agility and a prop mod.

I don’t think this is a terrible idea, I think it would just be a huge pain in the butt to work with and even more importantly: balance.

Adding new tiers of things isn’t the answer.

8

I could see it, but though CCP themselves didn’t stick to well with the stated intent behind slot layout, you should try to do so with this in mind.

High Power slots project effects at range away from the ship
Medium Power slots project effects external to the ship, but not at significant range
Low Power slots are internal to the ship, or on the surface at best.

Many modules break this pattern, such as Ewar being in the mid slots when it really should all be high slot stuff, but this was their stated intent.

So keeping that in mind adjust your concepts for a single effect, applied at the various power levels. Whatever the base module is, I see no reason it should do more or less than the base effect in it’s native slot, for instance:

Thrust Multiplier (T3 Afterburner)
Low- Provides resistance to webbing effects, but does not increase speed beyond normal maximum
Mid- Operates as an Afterburner
High- Reverse Tractor beam, provides thrust away from the ship. Result would be enemies approach slower, orbits get wider, etc… (if they figure out how to code this I would love if they would scrap all the various webs and just use tractors for tackle)

1 Like
9

However, while the idea may make for an interesting discussion, I don’t think the overall idea is very good, or really any sort of ‘T3’ module.

The idea behind T3 wasn’t supposed to be ‘better’ but ‘adjustable’. Modules have always had this property, and trying to shoehorn in an extra gimmick to make a T3 module is just screaming for power creep.

If they did want to make T3 modules, several existing modules should be reworked to be put in that category:

Reactive Armor Hardener. Practically the poster child for adjustable performance on the fly.

Ancillary Shield Booster. Needs reworked away from Cap Free Supertank module anyway, and performs radically differently depending on if it has charges available or not without deactivating entirely. (well, till your cap drains a second later)

Ancillary Armor Repairer. A better try at the ASB concept and more true to their stated design goals of allowing player interference, it’s performance also varies based on available resources without deactivating entirely.

Nearly anything with a script. Scripts were a semi-clunky work around using existing ammo mechanics to vary the performance of certain modules, and all of them would make excellent candidates for a rework into the T3 concept.

1 Like
10

Thanks folks. That makes sense. Will see what I can do on whether to continue working on this concept or not, and if I do, will see what kind of examples to propose. It is really tricky and yes, if something like that is implemented, it will be hard to balance for sure.

I am curious to know what CCP imagines when they say “T3 module”…