Anyone who knows me knows that I will tell anyone who asks (and anyone who doesn’t for that matter) not to fit WCS modules in any situation. They’re just not worth it; almost literally any low slot module will work there better. But that’s not because I’m not opposed to the idea of being able to counter warp disruption, it’s because WCS modules themselves are in a sad, sorry state of affairs. Most effects in EvE outside of specialist items like WDFGs and area effects like bubbles have some sort of countering mechanism, so it seems reasonable to me that a some form of counter to warp disruption should be in the game. They just need to be better at their job, and “stack N modules for most effect” fittings are kind of dull.
After reading this topic, I did a little thinking about them. Here are my thoughts:
Have higher meta WCS modules offer higher levels of warp core strength boost. 1 point for T1/meta, 2 points for T2, 3 points for faction. (Oh, and introduce faction WCS modules.)
Make them active, scriptable modules. Unscripted modules would boost your warp core strength (EDIT: by only the 1, 2, or 3 point base score, no other bonuses applied), there would be one script to counter the effects of warp scrambling (i.e. turning off your MWD/MJD), and one script to reduce (not counter) the effects of webs. Scripted modules would lose their boost to warp core strength so only one effect would be active at a time. (Possibly make the countering of warp scrambling limited to faction modules considering its power.)
Only allow one active WCS module per ship at a time. This would keep them in line with other active propulsion modules.
Maybe make it a mid slot module? This would again keep it in line with other active propulsion modules, but it could have larger overall balance effects.
Maybe change the penalties? The targeting penalties currently associated with WCS modules have always seemed…off to me. I feel like a flat reduction to all resists (all damage types, all EHP types) would be more appropriate for what I’m proposing. You’re using your WCS as an “oh crap” button to get out of a jam with your propulsion system (pun totally intended), so being more vulnerable to incoming weapons fire while the module is active seems fair.
EDIT: Fitting costs and cap usage would be TBD. Given the benefits and flexibility, I’d say that the fitting costs should increase from current modules and the cap usage should be non-trivial.
This would make WCS modules considerably more versatile, still limit their utility on combat ships (although I could see some WCS/MJD combat fits being useful), and force players away from the whole “just fill my lows with WCS modules and I’ll be uncatchable” way of thinking.
Thoughts?
(EDIT: Edited to clarify/better organize thoughts.)
WCS work just fine as is. only people who complain about them are people who get pissy when they don’t get their way and feel some how entitled to their idea of a fight
Those same people would likely still complain even with thse changes (since you’d never get more than 3 points of protection), but the whole idea of “fit N modules for N points of protection” just runs counter to how other other passive propulsion modules work (i.e. stacking penalties), so I figured that switching WCS modules to be active instead of passive may at least make them less boring and more flexible.
It doesn’t run counter to how any other module in eve works at all… you may be comparing fruit but they are apples and oranges. Stacking penalties are applied to modules that give % based bonuses not modules based on what category they belong to. Mods that give a flat addition do not have any sort of stacking penalty as they would never suffer from exponential growth.
likewise just because a module gives % bonuses does not mean that they will have a stacking penalty. For example shield recharge mods are designed areound the idea of being exponentially more powerfull with each one.
Right, right. I know not all attributes are stacking penalized, nor do I think they should be. And in particular, attributes that give a flat bonus shouldn’t be, nor can they be really.
But most attributes that aren’t stacking penalized typically get modified by modules that provide reasons to not just fill a whole slot rack with them. For example the shield recharger you mentioned works better (in terms of shield HP/sec) when used in conjunction with a shield extender instead of just adding a second shield recharger. So it’s not explicitly stacking penalized, but it makes more fitting sense to kind of treat it like it is. Same as shield extenders and shield hardeners; sure you can just keep stacking on extenders without penalty, but you’ll probably get more performance in terms of EHP if you add on a hardener or two.
Basically, any time I see people fitting 4 or more of the same module (aside from weapons or highly specialized “outside the box” fits) on a regular basis, that tells me that something isn’t quite right with that module, stacking penalized or not. And since there really isn’t any crresponding module to pair with WCS modules, I figured making them an active module like MWDs and ABs would be a better route to go.
good sir… you should never use a shield recharger… ever. you will always get more shield HP/s out of an extender than you will out of a recharger and you get more flat HP to boot. Now I hear you say “But Lugh what if I don’t have the PG for another extender” and i’m glad you asked. In that case you put on a hardener again giving you more EHP/s and more flat EHP. Shield recharges are and have always been a useless mod put in the game to fool poor souls into thinking they will help them get their shields to recharge faster.
however! you do want to fill your entire low slot rack with shield relays/flux coils depending on the build you are going for so again your point doesn’t hold up. THE ONLY EXCEPTION being maybe just maybe a DCU if you are feeling snazzy. so yes there are mods in the game that you do just toss a load of on other than weapon mods.
E-war and nuets are another set of mods that you do this with. nuets and ECM being another set that are not stacking penalized.
I think we’re in violent agreement here regarding shield rechargers. I only brought them up as an example because you did, but in practice I can’t think of a single fit where they’d actually be useful. And I hear you re: shield flux coils and relays…but I’m also of the opinion that they should get tweaked to for the exact same reason; fitting 4 or more of the same module seems like bad design. So…at least I’m consistent. Heh.
The counter to ECM is a scripted sensor booster. The ECM modules aren’t stacking penalized, but the sensor boosters are.
The counter to neuts is a cap battery. They aren’t stacking penalized, but the fitting is non-trivial so you rarely fit more than one.
See where I’m going here? There are traits that are stacking penalized so it only makes sense to fit a handful of those modules, and there are traits that are not, so those modules should be limited by other means (be it fitting, max number allowed, etc.).
In hindsight, I think maybe I should have posted this in the context of my broader thoughts on module balance…
As someone who generally flies DST’s and Blockade Runners, I haven’t found much use for stabs. I think a single +2 module restricted to T1 industrials, with a drawback in cargo capacity (all holds) might be reasonable. The drawback should be sufficient that it is a meaningful tradeoff between safety and capacity - perhaps 25%.
I don’t believe they have any place on a combat ship.
Each ship would be able to only fit a single WCS module. While active and unscripted, that module would provide either 1, 2, or 3 points of protection. While scripted to serve another function or inactive, it would provide no protection. Fitting costs would also increase. So in the end, the most any ship could have is 3 points of protection, unlike now where a ship can have as many points as they have low slots and CPU for.
I’ve never been a fan of limiting modules to specific ship types outside of very specific circumstances. WDFGs, siege modules, etc. I think WCS modules should be able to be fit to any ship, but the penalties for equipping/using one should be sufficient that their use would be uncommon.
To your point, I agree that WCS modules as currently implemented have no real purpose on combat ships. The penalties incurred don’t really justify the benefits gained. But I don’t necessarily think it has to be that way.
my point was you do however fill entire racks with the ECM or the nuets themselfs not the counters. Also when using batteries just to get nuet resistance you fit small so there is very little fitting cost in that regard (they are also % based in that respect and have stacking penalties)
PDUs cap rechargers and flux coils are other mods you will see entire racks being filled with. It really isn’t all that uncommon in eve.
not to mention there are entire ship lines in eve balanced around the current way WCS function. industrials can either have more cargo or more points of stability. Like wise they can either chose to give up max tank for this or they can chose to have a lower potential stability.
Maybe Propulsion should have its own slots separate from highs , lows and mids. Rework propulsion and the fittings we have, with more counter options for various electronic warfare devices. That way your propulsion systems are not interfering with the ships weaponry/tanking etc. And you would not be sacrificing so much in theory crafting your fit to counter web/scram etc. Just an idea.
While you’re not wrong, a wider rework of how ships both engage and avoid engagement, making it harder to escape a fight, would go a long way towards helping people fight.
Currently it’s just warp in a max speed, wack a guy and run. This is due to cynos, but also due to other factors.
I’d like to use brawling weaponry, but the dps output and other factors make it mostly meaningless to try without a dedicated team. Even then, it’s just not up to part with long range.
False, you just kill the ship. Random rolls /= counter options existing.
I’d agree, but it’s also too easy to leave a fight. What happened to committing? Is that only for siege capable caps?
You aren’t wrong, but I don’t think that would be a bad thing. We are so far out of control with the way players are using ships right now that a good shakeup on ship lines and guns would go a long way.
Ask yourself, whats a frigate for? A destroyer? A cruiser? A battlecruiser? A battleship?
Why as a general rule for these ships are their ship class designations completely ignored?
Why is anything with an assault damage control used almost exclusively outside of trig ships?
