[01:00] <selto_black> For it to feel consistent in pve? ... I'd have to mull it over for awhile.
[01:01] <hoodie-mafia> I would suggest 50% of the bonus to be applied over 30 sec
[01:01] <hoodie-mafia> and 50% to be permanent
[01:01] <hoodie-mafia> Or until mode swap, after which eveything resets
[01:02] <johndrees> Ok, well I think in pvp it's a poor idea because of the rapid pace pvp takes place at. In 30 seconds the engagement may be over.
[01:02] <hoodie-mafia> The numbers can be adjusted
[01:02] <hoodie-mafia> The idea is usable
[01:02] <syenna-celeste> We're not finalizing numbers here. That's not our job.
[01:03] <johndrees> Well if you're going to propose an idea to have it discussed the numbers are relevant to said discussion.
[01:03] <hoodie-mafia> I just think that it does exactly what Fozzie was looking for. It promotes manual piloting, requires a pilot to carefully watch buffs and it gives an incentive to swap modes
[01:04] <hoodie-mafia> While making them slightly weaker overall
[01:04] <hoodie-mafia> Johndrees that is why I gave example numbers
[01:05] <johndrees> I know, and it's not an unrealistic figure. It points out a potential negative though.
[01:05] <selto_black> It also grossly overcomplicates the mode switch mechanic by applying arbitrary timers. For a new player that's simply unreasonable.
[01:06] <syenna-celeste> @hoodie-mafia: Would you want the bonus to be as strong as the passive? I'm not sure if I like that detail or not.
[01:06] <syenna-celeste> @selto_black: If a new player can't handle what is really something very simple then maybe they should stick to flying derptrons.
[01:06] <syenna-celeste> This is hardly the most obscure mechanic.
[01:07] <johndrees> Ok, just to clarify what you guys are saying. Do you think the ship bonus should be applied over time after a mode switch or deminish over time after a mode switch?
[01:07] <chessur> no i think that it is a poor idea
[01:07] <scipioartelius> I don't like that idea either
[01:07] <hoodie-mafia> It should dissipate when you switch
[01:07] <scipioartelius> jsut seems overly complex
[01:08] <syenna-celeste> instant change from one to the other. it was mentioned earlier but other changes are cleaner.
[01:08] <ascentior> The issue I usually find with raw data like this is that those numbers were chosen knowing that other things effect the speed of the ship. Like armor plates vs shield extenders, etc.
[01:08] <johndrees> I'm not really into it either but we should completely hear the fellas out.
[01:08] <selto_black> What is simple to you is not simple to everyone. Keeping track of d-scan, heat, distance to target, and all the other myriad of things for a newer player is hard.
[01:09] <ascentior> Also ship mass/role will change the prop mod 'real world' result
[01:09] <syenna-celeste> We're talking about a temporary bonus applied on top of what would be (weaker than now) passive mode bonuses for a short time after switching to a mode.
[01:09] <hoodie-mafia> Noone is forcing a new player into a T3D, thats why its Tech 3, it comes after you learn to fly T1 ships
[01:09] <scipioartelius> totally. Fits and skills are always going to have an effect. It's not going to show edge cases, just glaring issues if they exist
[01:10] <hoodie-mafia> Yes syenna-celeste , so the overall effect would be the same for X seconds but would be halved after that time
[01:10] <syenna-celeste> So if you're in prop mode with +20% speed, you change to defensive and lose 20% speed, but gain 15% resists permanently + 15% resists for 20 seconds or something.
[01:10] <johndrees> Kinda, although with such a light training time into such an effective ship...it's hard to argue that they aren't for new players.
[01:10] <chessur> I really dislike the slow decay idea
[01:11] <hoodie-mafia> Exactly syenna-celeste
[01:11] <hoodie-mafia> It doesnt have to be slow decay Chessur
[01:11] <hoodie-mafia> It could be a 50% dropoff after X seconds
[01:11] <syenna-celeste> Then you switch back, gain 20% speed + 20% speed for 20 seconds while losing?_all of the resist bonus_?that you got from defensive. And these changes are all instant like they are now.
[01:11] <syenna-celeste> Not decay. Just a drop.
[01:11] <hoodie-mafia> With its own visual
[01:11] <syenna-celeste> Or timer.
[01:11] <selto_black> But t3ds offer such an interesting touchstone for new players. It allowes them to be able to feel the difference that adding more tank/speed/projection to their fit could do without having to actually change their fit.
[01:11] <hoodie-mafia> yea
[01:12] <johndrees> Hmm, sounds kinda lame and it is a lot to keep track of for anyone, especially a new player.
[01:12] <scipioartelius> I expect all of us in this group will know what the glaring issues are, so if someone suggests a particular change, then the stats provide a quick way to see quantitatively what effect that will have and how it compares to other ships and classes of ship. Maybe not useful to anyone. I personally like to look at the numbers, but that's me
[01:12] <chessur> what if mode switch
[01:12] <selto_black> any of you pvpers wanna come tear me a new one on sisi?
[01:12] <hoodie-mafia> New players shouldn't fly Tech 3 ships until they learn how to do other things first by flying simpler ships
[01:13] <chessur> was 3 different playstyle choices
[01:13] <chessur> ie
[01:13] <chessur> kite mode, brawl mode, ewar mode
[01:13] <selto_black> Why hoodie?
[01:13] <selto_black> Why should a newer player be limited to what older players were forced to do?
[01:13] <chessur> switching mode will change your ship bonus accordingly. kite has speed / projection. Brawl has tank / dps and ewar has bonuses to racial ewar
[01:14] <hoodie-mafia> Because this is an advanced ship, its in the name! You cannot limit everything for new player experience
[01:14] <hoodie-mafia> Holy cow chessur breaks down the door
[01:14] <selto_black> It's also a destroyer.
[01:14] <syenna-celeste> There's nothing stopping a new player from flying one, but it will take practice and knowledge to get the most out of them. This is not a bad thing.
[01:15] <sardcaid> Chessur's assertion regarding "group consensus on what T3D's should do, how they should do it, and relation to mode switch" is a good starting point on any meaningful balance discussion. Regardless of where our individual experience or motives are, I think we can come to some level of agreement on what T3D should and shouldn't be.
[01:15] <hoodie-mafia> That would require a whole lot of theoryzing behind it Chessur, but I would love to hear it
[01:15] <destoya> The stats/bonuses make t3d powerful to the point that they prop up subpar practice and knowledge in my opinion
[01:16] <sardcaid> It might be a good idea to start a google doc or similar to log focal points of this discussion, and work out finer details in dialogue here.
[01:16] <selto_black> Is that a bad thing destoya?
[01:16] <hoodie-mafia> Selto, the fact that it is a destroyer says nothing for its new player status, an interdictor is also a destroyer yet it is very far away from being a new player friendly ship
[01:16] <destoya> Not necessarily
[01:17] <sardcaid> Slack's archiving is very tedious to scroll through, especially considering time constraints / time zones of this group
[01:18] <johndrees> @chessurI like the idea but because brawling and kiting fits are different in the modules that they use, how does this idea encourage mode switching during an engagement? Currently if I am in a beam confessor I have to slow down and risk getting chased down in order to dps targets from long range. If I had long range and speed at the same time I would never switch modes unless I got scrammed and it was a last ditch effort to try and survive.
[01:19] <chessur> true
[01:19] <chessur> however if you had a more all around fit
[01:19] <chessur> it could help you push into a role you need
[01:20] <chessur> if you try to make a kiting fit, ofc you are going to stay in kite mode
[01:20] <chessur> asyou would now
[01:20] <selto_black> T3d imo offer players a gateway to learn the skills needed to start working their way up the difficulty curve. They get the benefits of changing their stats without having to change their fit.
[01:20] <chessur> normally a kiting confessor is in speed mode, and will switch to sharp shooter at times
[01:20] <chessur> but has no reason to go into defense mode
[01:20] <chessur> this goes back to how you fit your ship
[01:20] <chessur> do you choose to be very specialized, and only use one mode?
[01:20] <selto_black> This I think encourages players to learn to fit properly.
[01:20] <johndrees> Well, that's what I'm telling you. Right now, it's better to switch modes when kiting. It would not be if those modes were one in the same.
[01:20] <chessur> or fit your ship to be more flexible and take advantage of the other switching more readily
[01:21] <hoodie-mafia> Except that specializing is almost always better Chessur
[01:22] <chessur> and your point?
[01:22] <hoodie-mafia> How would you bring it down to a point where taking a more flexible fitting (and losing specialization) is actually worth it?
[01:22] <chessur> That is the pilots choice
[01:22] <hoodie-mafia> My point is that everyone will still just specialize
[01:22] <chessur> you already see the specialization
[01:22] <chessur> an arty svip / beam confessor are never brawling
[01:22] <chessur> they never want to be brawling
[01:23] <chessur> same for a pulse confessor or AC svipul
[01:23] <chessur> they are not kiting
[01:23] <johndrees> Right, so what you've suggested is simply a huge buff to those specialized ship fits.
[01:23] <chessur> yep
[01:23] <johndrees> Lol
[01:23] <chessur> tone down
[01:24] <chessur> the other problems
[01:24] <selto_black> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w YouTube Extra Credits Perfect Imbalance - Why Unbalanced Design Creates Balanced Play - Extra Credits
[01:24] <selto_black> this is something id like to see discussed.
[01:24] <chessur> IE. the insane tracking / tank / dps of a kiting ship
[01:24] <johndrees> Alright then let's buff all the t3d! Case closed.
[01:24] <chessur> the crazy speed of a brawling one
[01:24] <chessur> make more severe trade offs
[01:24] <chessur> like you see in the jackdaw
[01:24] <chessur> or hecate
[01:26] <hoodie-mafia> Does that not lead the usage of just a single mode to strenghten your fit of choice
[01:26] <hoodie-mafia> As in, I fit blasters and a heavy tank on my Hecate so I will simply use only the Defensive mode
[01:26] <johndrees> Yep
[01:26] <chessur> if you choose to fit you ship that way
[01:26] <chessur> then yes it can
[01:26] <chessur> that is how it is now
[01:26] <chessur> however
[01:26] <chessur> if you have a more variable fit
[01:26] <chessur> then other modes could be used
[01:27] <johndrees> Well people specialize now, but they still switch modes.
[01:27] <hoodie-mafia> I could be wrong, but my first feeling is that it will make the problem worse
[01:29] <syenna-celeste> I disagree with the remodelling modes completely The existing modes are close to being on the money but need tuning. The Jackdaw and Hecate are in a pretty good place by most accounts, and you need to switch modes regularly to get the most out of both of them. The Svipul is too strong because its modes are gravy to an already strong base hull.
[01:29] <syenna-celeste> Solution: More stats on the modes, less stats on the hull.
[01:29] <syenna-celeste> Make people choose.
[01:35] <selto_black> ^ this.
[01:35] <johndrees> Yep
[01:38] <syenna-celeste> Still doesn't discourage sitting in one mode though. And I like Hoodie's suggestion for solving that.
[01:39] <selto_black> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea6UuRTjkKs YouTube Extra Credits When Difficult Is Fun - Challenging vs. Punishing Games - Extra Credits
[01:40] <johndrees> People already switch modes to get the most out of the ship. An artificially imposed reason to switch does not take into account the context of an actual engagement and in my opinion would result in a paralysis of choice problem where people would simply accept the drawback and stay in one mode.(edited)
[01:41] <hoodie-mafia> Which in turn makes them much more in line with other small ships does it not? Having only half the bonus makes them a lot weaker
[01:43] <chessur> I still feel that having to 'give' something (Cap for example) to switch modes
[01:43] <chessur> could go a long way in helping to balance these ships
[01:44] <johndrees> I think when they are engaging other small ships the fight is mostly over before the deminishing bonus would come into play. Unless you make the time to effect shorter which imposes an even more horrible option, the requirement to switch to a mode you do not want simply to switch back as soon as possible to retain the bonus.
[01:45] <sardcaid> I'll bite - regarding imbalance, T3D's take that on by filling a niche that's only seen with T3C - they have options well beyond the defined roles of other T2 or faction ships. They're by design interesting and unbalanced as there is no other ship in the game that can match their adaptability. The issue we run into in their current iteration is their base attributes, combined with the benefits yielded from each mode
[01:47] <hoodie-mafia> How is it fair to judge that option on T3D vs frigate fights though? I feel like wanting a t1 or T2 frigate or destroyer to go toe to toe with a T3D is not a good balancing point
[01:47] <sardcaid> T3D's are great fun and a good addition to the game - I think ship 'stances' are amazing fun. I don't think anyone can argue against that. The issues we run into are the incredibly powerful modes that the ships have, in excess of what we'd expect out of any T2 specialist ship
[01:47] <sardcaid> this is combined with very powerful base attributes
[01:48] <hoodie-mafia> Unless its 2v1 or more in which case the 30 seconds would be limiting
[01:49] <johndrees> I completely agree with the statement sard. I'd add that it is important to consider that part of what makes them imbalanced is that they are very inexpensive for how good they are. A t3d at twice it's current cost would still be worth it for players looking for a ship to full their current roll but they wouldn't be competing directly in the price range of t2 and faction frigates.
[01:49] <sfm_hobb3s> Ever since t3d's came out I have loved flying them. It really boils down to the versatility. It's actually the first ship in Eve that for me has the capability of defending myself (as in, by myself) and still being able to contribute to fleets of nearly any size. I've gone to hell and back in my 1mn mwd beam confessor. And for once, I could actually make a difference, not being just an F1 button masher. Back in Black Legion fleets would get called and no matter the doctrine, the FC's were completely fine with me showing up in my confessor. They knew I'd be hazing E-war and killing or keeping the tackle away. And they could count on me not to die. Well, not often anyways. 1400+ kills with likely less than 10 losses is fantastic. So much so I'm not phased at all by the upcoming insurance nerf. You might think that versatility is overpowered when it comes to small or medium gang action, but for big fleet fights, especially in null, its crucial. Just like real world snipers I was often firing and relocating (warping around), and many times would get sucked into a hostile bubble. I did get killed a few times this way, but more often then not was saved by the ships versatility (switching to prop mode).
[01:50] <johndrees> I dont, I think t3d should essentially beat down frigates almost every time assuming both are fit and flown equally well. The problem in my opinion is actually the survivability of the svipul against larger ships.
[01:52] <syenna-celeste> What is the point of anything labelled a destroyer (a class whos express purpose is to ruin the days of frigates) being easy to 1v1 in a frigate
[01:52] <johndrees> Agreed.
[01:52] <chessur> if you make a destroyer that can destroy all frigates with ease
[01:52] <chessur> then you are creating the BC era a few years ago
[01:53] <chessur> except this time, its just for frigates
[01:53] <selto_black> The versatility of these ships should remain through any nerfs we come to a consensus on, However, i do believe that the svipuls and the confessors modes need new and unique modifiers to be both useable and within perfect imbalance.
[01:53] <hoodie-mafia> I dont think they meant it should automatically destroy frigs
[01:53] <chessur> the mobility + projection of T3D's is oppressive to frigates
[01:53] <syenna-celeste> Not saying all frigates, but the talk of a single frigate being able to take on a t3d is ludicrous.
[01:53] <hoodie-mafia> just that it is ok if there is an inherent advantage for the T3d
[01:53] <syenna-celeste> ^
[01:53] <chessur> A frigate can kill sabre / eris with little problem
[01:54] <selto_black> Destroyers are supposed to be frigate killers.
[01:54] <syenna-celeste> But it isn't a level playing field is the point.
[01:54] <hoodie-mafia> But most frigates will get destroyed by one
[01:54] <selto_black> thats what they do
[01:54] <johndrees> So, in my opinion increasing t3d price may help encourage more diversity in pvp ships. With its current price and capabilities the ship is a nearly unbeatable value. Changing nothing else I would suspect a price increase would help make other ships a good option.
[01:54] <johndrees> Well, many of the frigates enjoy specialized roles which give them purpose. The assault frigate is the black sheep in that regard.
[01:54] <syenna-celeste> It's great that a frigate can kill a destroyer, but it will be tilted against the frigate. That's always been the case and it should stay that way.
[01:54] <chessur> in the T3Ds case however
[01:54] <chessur> there isd no tilt
[01:54] <chessur> just a cliff
[01:55] <hoodie-mafia> because its 2 steps up?
[01:55] <sardcaid> insurance is being reduced to T2 payouts
[01:55] <johndrees> I know.
[01:55] <hoodie-mafia> Have you seen an Omen solo a proteus yet chessur?
[01:55] <chessur> lol
[01:55] <chessur> we are talking about cruisers now?
[01:56] <hoodie-mafia> No I am making the comparison of a class being 2 steps higher
[01:56] <selto_black> now that td3s are being removed from small plexes and having their insurance nuked, we need to make sure that their uses arent useless in them selves
[01:56] <sardcaid> T3Ds are being removed from small outposts?
[01:56] <hoodie-mafia> Frig > T2 frig > T3D
[01:56] <hoodie-mafia> Ofcourse it is a cliff
[01:56] <johndrees> I think that's a good step but I bet more people base purchases on the ships price the insurance payout.
[01:56] <selto_black> so one question id like answered is should a destroyer be able to kill a cruiser reliably.
[01:56] <hoodie-mafia> Is that a bad thing?
[01:57] <johndrees> I think the answer is no.
[01:57] <sardcaid> I know I very much consider cost of a ship after insurance as a significant factor for regular PvP in a ship
[01:57] <sardcaid> I agree for what T3D currently offer 30-40 mil is far too reasonable, however
[01:58] <selto_black> I can never remember to insure my ships >.>
[01:58] <chessur> I am not saying T1 frig all of the time
[01:58] <sardcaid> I don't know if that's a bad thing after changes
[01:58] <chessur> just in general. Faction / pirate included
[01:58] <fintarue> joined #tactical-destroyers
[01:58] <sardcaid> hey fin
[01:59] <johndrees> Hello
[01:59] <sardcaid> @selto_black: where was it confirmed that T3D are to be removed from small outposts?
[01:59] <selto_black> Day 4 summit minuets i thought
[01:59] <ascentior> I think I'm in the wrong room, is this a streaming convention:simple_smile:
[02:00] <syenna-celeste> Short of deleting the whole class I can't think of many ways to solve that particular cliff.
[02:00] <sardcaid> The revolution shall be televised!
[02:00] <chessur> i just feel that absolutes are bad for gameplay
[02:00] <fintarue> Howdy howdy
[02:00] <fintarue> Sard, it was in a forum thread
[02:00] <selto_black> 7o
[02:00] <fintarue> about the t3d
[02:01] <scipioartelius> https://ccpfocusgroups.slack.com/archives/tactical-destroyers/p1444269563000277 sardcaid @selto_black: where was it confirmed that T3D are to be removed from small outposts? Oct 8th at 1:59 AM
[02:01] <johndrees> Alright so which t3d are regularly killing cruisers? I know it's fully possible with each one in its own regard and we may not have available statistics but I can absolutely say that when I am out pvp'ing the only t3d I hesitate to engage in something like a cynabal is the svipul.
[02:01] <fintarue> Same post where he said about the lowered costs of insurance
[02:01] <sardcaid> You're the first I've heard about T3D removal from small outposts, so that'd be nice as a confirmation. Most players are uniform that T3D aren't fun in small outposts competition wise
[02:01] <ascentior> https://ccpfocusgroups.slack.com/archives/tactical-destroyers/p1444269563000277 Fozzie said it in the announcement for the focus group attendees
[02:01] <scipioartelius> Summit day 4 and Fozzie mentioned it here earlier
[02:01] <sardcaid> ah, I didn't follow up much on E-O
[02:02] <sardcaid> cool
[02:02] <selto_black> The sentinel would like a word?
[02:02] <fintarue> I thin it would also be important for us to detail the things about the ships that need worked, whether cause too strong, or weak if any
[02:02] <sardcaid> yeah, that's a common sentiment fin
[02:02] <johndrees> Ha
[02:03] <sardcaid> I think we should be putting together a google doc soon for that
[02:03] <chessur> what about it?
[02:03] <johndrees> Haha
[02:03] <fintarue> That's what I was about to suggest
[02:03] <chessur> i can think of 3 frigs off the top of my head that kill it
[02:03] <chessur> very easily
[02:04] <ascentior> Discussion about how we discuss > discussion about what we should discuss > discussing the topic
[02:04] <selto_black> The fact that the sentinel can counter all t3ds except the daw fairly easily.
[02:04] <chessur> you think so?
[02:04] <selto_black> I do, though you would have better experience in the area.
[02:05] <selto_black> I'd need to play test to figure it out.
[02:05] <ascentior> I?_hope_?CCP have a bit of a structured plan for this focus group, and these first few hours (until they are back at work) is probably safe to spend just ripping on.. er... getting to know each other
[02:05] <chessur> svipul can kill one easily
[02:05] <chessur> jackdaw
[02:05] <selto_black> Even under TD?
[02:05] <chessur> and a confessor that is fitting a cap booster
[02:05] <chessur> should also have no trouble
[02:05] <chessur> same with hecate
[02:06] <sardcaid> well
[02:06] <chessur> and yes, even under td
[02:06] <forsot> Once the majority of people have arrived I'll start asking some questions to get us going
[02:06] <chessur> sentinel has no tank, limited speed, and no dps
[02:06] <chessur> by itself, its really not that scary
[02:06] <hoodie-mafia> like it should have
[02:06] <hoodie-mafia> its not a combat ship
[02:06] <chessur> i have killed crucifiers with slicers very easily
[02:06] <chessur> for example
[02:06] <chessur> tds are nice
[02:06] <chessur> but unless you have range control
[02:06] <chessur> your tds mean nothing
[02:06] <selto_black> Fair point.
[02:07] <sardcaid> I'd like to think that we're collectively mature enough to agree on some structure, and be able to organize that with or without CCP aid
[02:07] <chessur> ie. there is counterplay
[02:07] <johndrees> Cool
[02:07] <johndrees> So this is all just warm up.
[02:07] <sardcaid> sure
[02:08] <ascentior> Yeah, I agree we?_can_?. And I suppose if it is too far from what CCP want to achieve, how they intended this proceeding, they can just say 'thanks but no thanks'
[02:08] <johndrees> dramiels are great at killing crucifiers as well.
[02:09] <hoodie-mafia> No you are right, I guess we differ on opinions though. I think a T2 frigate (like the Sentinel) should have a hard time vs any T3D
[02:09] <scipioartelius> Forming/storming/norming......it's going to happen, but I expect we'll move through it quickly
[02:09] <johndrees> They do currently have a hard time.
[02:09] <johndrees> So much so that you see fewer frigates than previously. Which is part of why we're all here.
[02:10] <syenna-celeste> You're seeing less frigates because they replace frigates not because they kill them.
[02:10] <hoodie-mafia> ^
[02:11] <johndrees> Yeah, I got that...
[02:12] <selto_black> What's the training time difference between T2 frigs and T3ds? Just to sit. No guns no tank.
[02:12] <johndrees> Uhh, t3d are actually faster to train into lol.
[02:13] <sardcaid> Yeah, this is very much a think tank effort
[02:13] <johndrees> Well, specifically faster than assault frigates.
[02:13] <selto_black> Well, ain't that a doozy of an issue.
[02:13] <selto_black> ^.^
[02:13] <johndrees> :simple_smile:
[02:13] <hoodie-mafia> same thing with Tech 3 cruisers though, but there you have the subsystems
[02:14] <hoodie-mafia> Its odd to me that the training time is so short
[02:15] <selto_black> A skill lock of say, awu III would fix that. And provide a necessary skill.
[02:27] <selto_black> Hrm, where's fozzie.
[02:29] <johndrees> Yeah, I'm curious to know if CCP is even considering a full rework of the entire ship class or if they are looking more for input regarding another balance pass. That may help put our discussion on track a bit more.(edited)
[02:35] <johndrees> Indeed.
[02:36] <johndrees> Ok, so I have an idea to discuss, what if the resistance bonus was removed from the svipul in defensive mode and replaced with an active tanking bonus (specifically for shields but I suppose it could do both). This matches other minmatar ship bonuses and may actually tone down the svipul a bit especially in instances where logistics are being used. If you combine that change with a class wide bump to signature radius the ships remain good at killing frigates but they would all be relatively vulnerable to bigger and stronger ships.
[02:38] <johndrees> If that isn't good enough create a rule for t3d that their active tanking bonuses don't apply to AAR or ASB. This would encourage the use of more expensive modules to attain the same defensive numbers and in the case of ASB's it would create a strong trade off for utilizing the bonus or having no cap dependency.(edited)
[02:40] <selto_black> If only medium deadspace shield reps didn't cost a small fortune.
[02:41] <syenna-celeste> Pithum c-types aren't awfully expensive.
[02:43] <selto_black> Still more expensive than an a-type armor rep.
[02:44] <johndrees> The point is to make the svipul rely on capacitor so that it is more vulnerable to crusier class ships and up that include an energy neut.
[02:44] <johndrees> If you want the best you can still have it if you pay some cash for it.
[02:44] <syenna-celeste> The difference is 8mil and for everything that isn't a Hecate, you'll be wanting 2 of the A-type armour reps.
[02:44] <syenna-celeste> Apples and oranges.
[02:44] <syenna-celeste> Also crystals.
[02:45] <scipioartelius> I'll start a google doc and send a share link to everyone so we can collaboratively update it
[02:45] <syenna-celeste> But Jackdaws do scale?_gloriously_?with a bit of bling.
[02:45] <syenna-celeste> Hell, they all do.
[02:45] <johndrees> Yeah that is true, people bling them now and they are quite good.
[02:45] <selto_black> Ohh, yes. 200m isk printer.
[02:46] <selto_black> Once I can afford it I'll swap out my power relay and t2 heat sink for imp navy sinks.
[02:48] <johndrees> So, what are your thoughts on a class wide signature radius increase to make them more vulnerable to larger ships?
[02:49] <selto_black> Rip t3d pve.
[02:50] <johndrees> Hmm, I guess I don't even think about pve in general. So it's good that you bring that perspective since I doubt most of the people in here are doing pve in t3d either.
[02:51] <selto_black> That's why I'm here ^.^
[02:52] <selto_black> Though to be less hyperbolic, the confessor could lose its sig bonus in defensive and not suffer too much.
[02:53] <johndrees> I still think the signature could increase slightly to make the ships more vulnerable to cruisers which might help. Do you think even a small increase would make pve with t3d non-viable?
[02:58] <selto_black> Sig is the bread and butter of t3d tanking.
[02:59] <selto_black> Would it ruin 100% of their pve use, no.
[03:00] <selto_black> But running c13's and 5/ 10's without perfect skills would be infinitely harder.
[03:06] <johndrees> Ok, well how about this idea
[03:07] <selto_black> To fix the neut immunity of the svip is a tricky task. My suggestion is to reduce the fitting costs of artys and the fitting space on the svip. But that would change the balance of minmatar frigs and dessies.
[03:08] <johndrees> Regarding the mode changes
[03:08] <selto_black> K.
[03:10] <johndrees> What if, you could switch modes like you do now but as you do it, you build up a cooldown timer. So you switch once and it's normal, you can switch again in the usual amount of time but if you do, the next one has an increased cooldown, something like 20 seconds instead of 10, if you switch again after 20 seconds but before the cooldown is finished it increases to 30 seconds. It would be kinda like a short duration jump fatigue but specifically for mode changes. This would encourage tactical use of the mode switching without stopping people from having fun with it as a part of their ship.
[03:12] <selto_black> That would not affect pve.
[03:13] <johndrees> So, first time, 10 seconds, second time, 20 seconds, third time 30 seconds. Obviously the times are completely flexible but for the sake of discussion...something like that?
[03:14] <selto_black> And a cap of 45 seconds?
[03:15] <johndrees> idk
[03:17] <ccp_rise> joined #tactical-destroyers
[03:17] <johndrees> hello
[03:17] <ccp_rise> hi
[03:18] <selto_black> I think that mechanic is workable, it does however make it advantageous to be the second person to attack the same t3d in a short amount of time.
[03:18] <selto_black> Because they won't have had a chance to burn through their cool down.
[03:20] <selto_black> 7o rise.
[04:18] <gorski_car> Hi friend
[04:20] <selto_black> Hey gorski.
[04:20] <selto_black> You got through back scroll yet?
[04:24] <gorski_car> Nope im at work for another 5 hours
[04:26] <selto_black> Ouch. Though I'm in the same boat. I just have the ability to create time >.>
[04:46] <namamai> joined #tactical-destroyers
[04:47] <namamai> Ack, so much backscroll. Give me a few:stuck_out_tongue:
[04:50] <selto_black> Has the fellowship of the svipul finnaly all gathered?
[04:56] <namamai> selto_black: "whats most popular then in your expierence" (re: svipuls)
[04:57] <namamai> There's one that we see a lot in null (and that I run into often in low) -- passive regen svipuls.
[04:58] <namamai> Lows full of shield power relays. Can either do a full rack of 200mms and no option high, or 150mms and a nos.
[04:58] <selto_black> Yessss I wanna try a passive svip in a c13 for giggles.
[04:58] <selto_black> See how quick I get poped.
[04:59] <namamai> The DPS is a little anemic (250ish at point-blank with RFEMP), but the passive regen in defensive mode is absolutely ridiculous -- 350dps+ by itself, and 500dps+ with offgrid shield resist links.
[04:59] <namamai> Which means that most frigates and T1/T2 destroyers, and even some cruisers, can't break its tank. At best, they neut it out (or slowboat away from it with the help of a web or two) and bail.
[04:59] <selto_black> If it's viable it may allow for the clearing of core gas sites in c13's
[05:01] <namamai> Regarding niden's chart of speeds, yep, the absurd speed of the Svipul and Confessor are a problem (or, at a minimum, that's why they're preferred for small gang / solo over the other two.) That said, don't forget to take into account their higher mass -- it affects the peak speed they can get from same-sized prop mods.
[05:03] <namamai> That's why the bump in mass for those two during the initial "5 guns -> 4 guns" balancing pass was so effective.
[05:19] <suitonia> joined #tactical-destroyers
[05:20] <suitonia> Greetings, travellers
[05:22] <selto_black> 7o
[05:24] <suitonia> On the subject of T3D speeds, I am a big fanboy of the Hecate propulsion mode, Base speed. And mass
[05:25] <suitonia> I think it's the perfect model, and should be given to both the svipul and confessor
[05:26] <destoya> Both the hecate and jackdaw feel pretty good in terms of mobility
[05:26] <destoya> Propulsion mode is something different than just going ludicrously fast
[05:27] <suitonia> Yes. I have a lot to say about this, at work for 4 hours but I will post it when I get back
[05:32] <suitonia> Hopefully you guys don't mind a copypaste without graphs
[05:32] <suitonia> The hecate propulsion mode and why its really well balanced. And why it should be used on other T3Ds
[05:32] <suitonia> I really love the design behind the Hecate propulsion mode, and the base stats that the Hecate has for speed, The Hecate has a really low mass, a Prop Mode bonus that only applies to MicroWarp Drives while having a really slow base speed. What that means is that the Hecate is really vulnerable to bigger ships while it is scrammed, but enjoys near perfect agility (1.99s align) and above the pack Combat Frigate speeds when it is not scrammed.
[05:32] <suitonia> The Hecate has a base speed of 213m/s (Assuming all level V, no modules which either subtract or add additional speed to the Hecate). This is slower than some Battlecruisers, which means while the Hecate is scrammed, assuming mutual control modules on both side (I.e. A cruiser has a scram+web, Hecate has scram+web) The cruiser will be faster, and will be able to dictate Traversal, and will therefore have perfect tracking vs the Hecate with good deflection piloting (Double click in space, move away, hecate will have to approach at a 0 degree angle). This also means Frigates, which are vulnerable and probably will die in scram range to the Hecate due to the strong tracking on the hull and optimal bonus it can achieve in sharpshooter mode, it means Frigates can control the Hecate, and will be able to scram kite it or leave if they can weather the DPS output, meaning it cant just permanently keep up with Frigates like the Svipul and Confessor can which both propulsion mode base speeds are faster than every combat frigate in the game.
[05:32] <suitonia> I really like this balance because it means that the Hecate has the best base agility in the game for a non-shuttle/pod. while having above pack Combat Frigate speeds when it is not committed or hard tackled, but means the Hecate is very vulnerable to Cruisers which have a warp scrambler module. This creates interesting balance/strength and weaknesses to the Hecate. Destroyers should be vulnerable to Cruiser weapons.
[05:32] <suitonia> The Svipul and Confessor Propulsion modes are incredibly powerful, and problematic in my opinion because it makes them too good at scram kiting, and especially incredibly hard to mitigate damage from even from kiting fits involving beams/artillery even if you outplay them and get on top of them at 0km you will be tracked perfectly.
[05:32] <suitonia> This also makes them incredibly hard to hold down for Cruisers, while a single web on a Hecate will prevent it from really going anywhere, cruisers need dual webs to hold down both the Confessor and the Svipul in order to keep up with them, and to apply their full damage to them. T3D Base Speed Base Prop Mode Combat Frigates Base Speed Confessor 294 490 Rifter 456 Svipul 288 479 Breacher 450 Jackdaw 213 283 Punisher 444 Hecate 213 213 Incursus 425 Tormentor 419 Tristan 406 Kestrel 406 Merlin 388
[05:32] <suitonia> The reason why the base speed is important, as mentioned, is that it is essentially a tracking boost for the Svipul and Confessor vs smaller ships attempting to go under their tracking. A 280mm Svipul with a defensive web will be faster than (or force MWD on and sig bloom which results in the same outcome) a close range brawling frigate with scram+web. A close range Rifter starting a fight at 0km, orbit 500 on a kiting 280mm Artillery Svipul, will get tracked absolutely perfectly because the Svipul enters speed mode, mutually webs the Rifter, then double clicks in space with superior speed, drops traversal to 0km and then has perfect tracking vs the Rifter. I feel the power of this mode makes Sharpshooter mode undervalued, since even against Interceptors, the Speed mode actually gives a better tracking increase than sharpshooter mode does, because of the angular velocity youre able to mitigate by going into speed mode.
[05:33] <suitonia> I also think that giving the T3Ds the same speed mode will help with taking away unwarranted complexity and weird game mechanic interactions, The hecate is able to warp 1.99s by staying in the speed mode, which makes a lot more sense to newer players, the Jackdaw has a similar interaction, although not quite <2.00 align. Both the Confessor and Svipul can perform this, but only by mode switching mid align from Speed to either Defensive/Sharpshooter, and this weird mechanical interaction is unintuitive to new players.
[05:37] <suitonia> If giving the confessor hecate-like mass hurts plate fits too much then consider a -50% penalty to plate mass. Role bonus (like the armor layering skill)
[05:37] <selto_black> If you force t3d's to use an mwd you kill their ability to run wormhole sites.
[05:42] <selto_black> This issue with mwd fits being non viable for wh pve really pokes me in the side. Meds are a liability for two reasons, sig and cap pressure.
[05:42] <suitonia> I honestly think applying the 66% bonus to abs too would be fine
[05:42] <suitonia> The Base speed is the biggest issue
[05:43] <selto_black> Instead of base speed, give all propmods a +66% modifier?
[05:43] <suitonia> Yeah. And hecate mass + Base speed
[05:43] <selto_black> That would unlock some interesting mechanical interactions.
[05:44] <suitonia> Although I personally feel that the hecate is fine
[05:45] <suitonia> And purely Pvp speaking, the hecate interaction with scrams is really intuitive and great gameplay
[05:45] <selto_black> Hecate faces some cap issues when considered for pve. But I agree with it being in a good spot.
[05:46] <selto_black> In theory, its great for running in, face tanking everything, kill the overseer and gtfo gameplay.
[05:56] <selto_black> A cap use reduction on reps wouldn't go remiss, but I could see that being slightly op.
[06:23] <namamai> Boosting all propmods would be viable if it weren't for the ability to used oversized propmods.
[06:24] <namamai> I'm not sure if it's possible to write a Dogma bonus that only applies to 1MN/5MN, and not to 10MN/5MN.
[06:25] <namamai> I'm torn on the Hecate -- on one hand, it feels like it's in a good place regarding balance. On the other hand, I rarely fly it, because I feel it has a lot of vulnerabilities in the current environment (in particular, neut pressure, and limited range compared to the Confessor). It's hard to endorse a balance point that I consider too weak to fly:confused:
[06:27] <namamai> The Jackdaw also feels in a good space for now, although I'd love a little more speed on it. GSF just replaced their Hawk doctrine with a Jackdaw doctrine, and the one thing everyone complains about is the reduced speed. (And that's with an overdrive in one of its two lows!)
[06:28] <namamai> In a way, that's one thing I don't like about Jackdaw -- the two low slots produce a lot of extremes in fits. Most viable fits for it use one of three combinations of lows -- overdrive/suitcase, bcs/suitcase, or 2x BCS.
[06:28] <selto_black> I think that the daw and Hecate fall as far below the power curve as the confessor is above.
[06:28] <namamai> I understand that, with six mids, there's a bit of a motive to ensure that it can't be armor tanked. But it's frustrating.
[06:28] <gorski_car> Jackdaw is really strong as a brawler imo
[06:29] <selto_black> It's true. And a really strong bait tackle.
[06:29] <namamai> It is -- although there's few reasons to use it for that over a Svipul.
[06:29] <selto_black> Is that the daws fault or the svips?
[06:30] <namamai> IMHO, that's the fault of the Svipul being strongly above the bar -- but I'm willing to hear arguments to the contrary.
[06:30] <selto_black> With the massive fitting space required by artys, any autocannons fit us going to have a lot of room to play with.
[06:30] <namamai> I would argue that there's one thing I don't like about the Jackdaw as-is -- the modes (especially defensive mode) are very strong, while the core stats are rather mediocre. There's a very hard tradeoff for modes.
[06:31] <selto_black> As gorski said in his article.
[06:31] <namamai> I like that, abstractly, but in practice it makes it a weaker hull.
[06:31] <namamai> Svipul and Confessor, which got the benefit of coming out OP as fuck and then being nerfed to their current state, tend to have solid core stats and relatively weaker modes.
[06:32] <selto_black> Yes. I'll agree with that.
[06:32] <selto_black> Should a middle ground be reached for all 4?
[06:32] <selto_black> Or should the fessor and svip be brought down only?
[06:33] <namamai> re: fitting space, that's more a condemnation of artillery than it is of the hull.
[06:33] <namamai> All the artillery, at all tiers, have absurd fitting requirements.
[06:33] <selto_black> THIS.
[06:34] <selto_black> dear god the entire set of mechanics surrounding minmatar needs retooled.
[06:35] <namamai> And on top of that, there's only two artillery options per size/tier, compared to the three railgun options per size. Hecate can vary between 75mm (which is practically a close-range weapon and honestly easier to fit than neutron blasters), 125mm, and 150mm; artillery gets 250mm and 280mm, both of which are hard to fit.
[06:35] <namamai> But that's a rant for a different session, tbh:stuck_out_tongue:
[06:36] <selto_black> But With regards to the svipul and artillery, the more artillery you expect to fit the more absurd your fitting space will be when fitting autos.
[06:38] <selto_black> That was one good thing about the reduction in hard points provided during their first nerf.
[06:49] <syenna-celeste> https://ccpfocusgroups.slack.com/archives/tactical-destroyers/p1444329217000830 namamai All the artillery, at all tiers, have absurd fitting requirements. Oct 8th at 6:33 PM
[06:49] <syenna-celeste> A thousand times this.
[06:50] <syenna-celeste> Make the PG requirements for artillery less insane even if it means tweaking ships, and then the Svipul will be much easier to balance.
[06:50] <syenna-celeste> If that isn't on the near horizon then it's going to be useless because of gimped fittings, or it will be far too easy to overprop.
[06:53] <namamai> Eh, you can add disincentives to overpropping by tweaking mass/agi, but not by much
[07:08] <johnnytwelvebore> Just skimmed the comments from last night. All sounds positive so far. Suggest next step is to make a framework for what we want to discuss as someone mentioned otherwise this will just turn into a rambling mess. Keeping comments on topic will really help once this starts.
[07:11] <johnnytwelvebore> Secondly I would suggest some testing on Sisi because we all have our own views about what T3Ds can and can't do, these opinions vary and even some very short tests could establish a benchmark and give us a baseline to start our comparison.
[07:12] <johndrees> So, now that there are some people here I'd like to ask you opinions again (since things are forever swept away into the mass of text we are generating lol); what do you guys think of a removal of the resistance bonus applied to the svipul in defensive mode and a replacement of a active tanking bonus?
[07:12] <johnnytwelvebore> Lastly I think we should get the idea that we all here to suggest nerfs slightly out of our heads. My view is that we need to find a unique drawback related to the versatility along the same lines as the skillpoint loss for T3 cruisers, along with what will probably be some small nerfs.(edited)
[07:16] <suitonia> I know that the defensive resistance bonus is incredibly strong, but it would stifle buffer tanked fits quite a bit.
[07:17] <suitonia> I think logi are a separate issue, and links
[07:17] <selto_black> It would help make the svipul more viable in pve applications outside of wormholes.
[07:17] <suitonia> Which are the main problems there
[07:17] <suitonia> How?
[07:18] <suitonia> The resistance bonus is already a 50% increase to active tank effectiveness
[07:18] <suitonia> 1 / 0.666666
[07:19] <suitonia> Is how much of an active tank bonus it is
[07:19] <selto_black> In ded's where your goal is to smash and grab the superior burst tank of shield fits is better over the buffer of armor.
[07:19] <sardcaid> I'm curious why T3D gain more than normal resistance bonuses anyway. They have T2 resist profile, and on top of that the greatest resist bonuses in the game
[07:20] <suitonia> Unless you are considering giving the svipul a 66% or more active tank bonus then it will be inferior to the current one
[07:20] <hoodie-mafia> probably inherited from T3 cruisers
[07:20] <suitonia> And make buffer fits weaker
[07:20] <hoodie-mafia> but in a "mode" form instead of a subsystem
[07:20] <selto_black> In that regard you maybe correct. Suitonis.
[07:20] <sardcaid> A major aspect of the design I dislike is that the mode swaps don't ape or match other ship equivalents, rather they blow them out of the water
[07:20] <suitonia> If the problem is resists
[07:20] <suitonia> I would reduce the bade resists on the hull itself
[07:21] <suitonia> I.E drop them down to combat recon level
[07:21] <suitonia> *Base
[07:22] <sardcaid> well you can either reduce the base hull attributes, and have strong modes, or have weaker modes with stronger base attributes
[07:22] <suitonia> Currently they have both
[07:22] <sardcaid> yeah
[07:22] <sardcaid> question is which way to go
[07:22] <sardcaid> what's more fun
[07:22] <suitonia> I would rather see strong modea
[07:22] <suitonia> Modes
[07:22] <suitonia> And lower Base stats
[07:22] <sardcaid> I'd say strong modes encourage mode swapping as requirement for an effective ship
[07:22] <suitonia> Yes
[07:23] <suitonia> As it should be imo
[07:23] <sardcaid> though you run into issue of modes being silly, like velocity buff
[07:23] <hoodie-mafia> the problem with strong modes and weaker base is that it gives another incentive to stay in your current mode
[07:23] <sardcaid> I like your suggestion regarding MWD boni on prop mode
[07:23] <sardcaid> solves a lot of issues
[07:23] <suitonia> Yeah, hecate is really balanced I feel
[07:24] <sardcaid> does it though, hoodie?
[07:24] <sardcaid> if you need to maneuver, then you?*should*?be in prop. if you need to tank, you?*should*?be in tank, etc
[07:25] <sardcaid> where as right now it's mostly tank mode, snipe mode for lock time, prop mode for sig on some ships and positioning
[07:25] <hoodie-mafia> perhaps, but you already see trends towards a specialization
[07:25] <sardcaid> I don't think that's a bad thing
[07:25] <hoodie-mafia> which makes sense
[07:25] <sardcaid> yeah
[07:25] <hoodie-mafia> I dont think so either, but I brought it up because Fozzie mentioned that we should stay away from stuff that discourages people from mode switching
[07:26] <sardcaid> okay
[07:26] <sardcaid> I think most players are in agreement that mode swaps are fun, so no issues there
[07:26] <johndrees> Yes
[07:26] <ccp_fozzie> I don't nessesarily think that strong modes and weaker base discourage mode switching
[07:26] <ccp_fozzie> my intuition is quite the opposite
[07:26] <sardcaid> it shouldn't
[07:26] <sardcaid> should be the opposite
[07:26] <sardcaid> yup
[07:27] <namamai> Yep -- if you have strong modes and a weak base, you get a lot of mode switching
[07:27] <sardcaid> Correct me if I'm wrong, hoodie is pointing out if you design your ship to brawl, then you're probably going to be in tank mode, as any other mode for your fit design doesn't make sense?
[07:27] <syenna-celeste> That's how I read it.
[07:27] <sardcaid> I think that's entirely on piloting and the situations players place themselves in however
[07:28] <ccp_fozzie> That leads me into the first official question I want to pose to the group now that everyone's here (this doesn't mean you have to stop talking about other topics though, lots of discussion is good)
[07:28] <sardcaid> if you create an adaptable jack of all trades fit, then you're going to benefit more from other modes
[07:28] <johndrees> Here it comes!
[07:28] <johndrees> :)
[07:28] <hoodie-mafia> yes thats what I meant Sard
[07:28] <namamai> That said, it also hinges a lot on ship type -- i.e. svipul tends to stay in tankmode 90% of the time because there's no purpose for sharpshooter other than locktime. with hecate/jackdaw, and even confessor a bit, you spend more time in prop mode or sharpshooter mode
[07:29] <ccp_fozzie> Consider the option of trying to push the mode switching mechanic further into the forefront
[07:29] <ccp_fozzie> so encouraging more switching in an average fight, and more of a performance difference between a pilot who knows how to mode switch well and one that doesn't
[07:30] <ccp_fozzie> which would hopefully raise the skill level required to get similar to current performance
[07:30] <ccp_fozzie> can you guys:
[07:30] <ccp_fozzie> A) point out opportunities you see to encourage that kind of gameplay
[07:31] <ccp_fozzie> b) point out issues that are holding it back (for instance common situations where people spend most of the fight in one mode)
[07:31] <ccp_fozzie> c) think about whether that goal is one you think will lead to better gameplay for both T3D pilots and those fighting against them (basically, should that be a priority of this balance pass)
[07:32] <sardcaid> is there a way for us to sticky this as a command we can recall or quote or something?
[07:32] <sardcaid> or place that in a google doc?
[07:32] <ccp_fozzie> For instance, one idea we've been bouncing around internally would be shifting some of the damage bonuses into the sharpshooter mode to provide more reasons to enter and exit that mode multiple times in a fight
[07:33] <syenna-celeste> Pinned a message.See all pinned items in this channel. CCP Fozzieccp_fozzie Consider the option of trying to push the mode switching mechanic further into the forefront Oct 8th at 7:29 PM
[07:34] <ccp_fozzie> Consider the option of trying to push the mode switching mechanic further into the forefront, so encouraging more switching in an average fight, and more of a performance difference between a pilot who knows how to mode switch well and one that doesn't which would hopefully raise the skill level required to get similar to current performance can you guys: a) point out opportunities you see to encourage that kind of gameplay b) point out issues that are holding it back (for instance common situations where people spend most of the fight in one mode) c) think about whether that goal is one you think will lead to better gameplay for both T3D pilots and those fighting against them (basically, should that be a priority of this balance pass)
[07:34] <ccp_fozzie> Pinned a message.See all pinned items in this channel. CCP Fozzieccp_fozzie Consider the option of trying to push the mode switching mechanic further into the forefront, so encouraging more switching in an average fight, and more of a performance difference between a pilot who knows how to mode switch well and one that doesn't which would hopefully raise the skill level required to get similar to current performance can you guys: a) point out opportunities you see to encourage that kind of gameplay b) point out issues that are holding it back (for instance common situationsShow more... Oct 8th at 7:34 PM
[07:34] <ccp_fozzie> c) think about whether that goal is one you think will lead to better gameplay for both T3D pilots and those fighting against them (basically, should that be a priority of this balance pass) For instance, one idea we've been bouncing around internally would be shifting some of the damage bonuses into the sharpshooter mode to provide more reasons to enter and exit that mode multiple times in a fight
[07:34] <ccp_fozzie> Pinned a message.See all pinned items in this channel. CCP Fozzieccp_fozzie c) think about whether that goal is one you think will lead to better gameplay for both T3D pilots and those fighting against them (basically, should that be a priority of this balance pass) For instance, one idea we've been bouncing around internally would be shifting some of the damage bonuses into the sharpshooter mode to provide more reasons to enter and exit that mode multiple times in a fight Oct 8th at 7:34 PM
[07:34] <namamai> I like it, although I'd also be concerned about it giving rise to sniper fleets that stay in sharpshooter 90% of the time and only switch to defensive mode when primaried.
[07:35] <namamai> i.e. just a tanker version of the nearly ubiquitous sniper corms
[07:35] <johndrees> One thing that could make the mode switching more important for each fight would be to create negative effects that happen simultaneously with the mode bonuses. So with regard to your internal discussion you just mentioned, perhaps an extreme version would be to make sharp shooter mode the equivalent of strapping on polarized weapons so that your resistances drop to zero but you get a huge dps increase?
[07:35] <ccp_fozzie> having a better method of pinning discussion topics is something I'll work on:simple_smile:
[07:36] <ccp_fozzie> @johndrees: you could get a similar effect by lowering base resists and increasing the resist bonus in defensive (and potentially increasing other damage mitigation in propulsion)
[07:36] <namamai> I mean, as much as I'd love to have a replacement for Harpies, I really don't. During their heyday, Harpyfleets were a cancer that outperformed pretty much every other AF fleet (and many cruiser-sized fleets).
[07:37] <namamai> And we all got really bored of flying them:confused:
[07:37] <ccp_fozzie> @namamai: in the hypothetical case of giving T3Ds the same dps as current while in sharpshooter and lower when outside of it, wouldn't the danger of that kind of sniperfleet dominance be lower or equal to today?
[07:38] <sardcaid> I think that the ship is more or less there for mode swaps being a valuable and important aspect of the ship, it's more a matter of increasing and decreasing the effect of each mode and the attributes of the ship to balance out the ship. That players tend to stick to one or two modes is partly due to those modes being stronger, but also a due to current ship meta and fitting ability
[07:39] <sardcaid> there's not a lot of reason in a beam confessor to be in tank mode, as the design of the ship is to be maneuvering and sniping
[07:39] <selto_black> Or switching out some bonuses with others that have more defined weaknesses.
[07:39] <sardcaid> there's not a lot of reason for an AC svipul to be out of tank or prop mods for similar reasons
[07:39] <suitonia> Also, speed mode gives you more effective tracking than sharpshooter
[07:40] <namamai> I think it'd be about equal to today's state. With Harpies, it's a fixed contribution per ship, and you just try to trade as efficiently as possible; with this theoretical setup, only the person being primaried is in defensive, and the rest of the fleet is in sharpshooter, and not much changes. At best, it afford tactics where you spread fire initially and try to spook a portion of the fleet into going defensive early.
[07:40] <namamai> Also, while I like the idea, I think it'd require a serious rethink of the Svipul's sharpshooter mode -- even with artillery it's still relatively ineffective outside of 30km or so.
[07:41] <suitonia> Unless you are triple webbed or serpentis webbed, prop mode Base speed provides more tracking from effective traversal you can remove
[07:41] <sardcaid> well, you have tactical options of fighting closer to harpies and fighting in defensive, for instance
[07:41] <sardcaid> as long as base stats allow for that, range and damage wise
[07:42] <namamai> But I do really like the idea overall of enhanced damage in sharpshooter mode.
[07:42] <sardcaid> it does seem to make sense namamai
[07:42] <selto_black> That would currently help in pve applications.
[07:43] <ascentior> Yeah I think structure is an obvious first step. But is nice to whet the whistle with a few opinionated posts first:relaxed:
[07:43] <selto_black> As it stands bloodraider and serpentis force me into Aurora range.
[07:43] <selto_black> Which means the sites take much longer.
[07:44] <suitonia> @ccp_fozziewould it be possible to have more powerful modes but have them decay over time so mode switching is more encouraged and 'stance dancing' would be a thing in the eve engine
[07:44] <hoodie-mafia> I suggested that earlier today, where X% of the bonus would wear off after X seconds
[07:44] <suitonia> I mean from a eve backend point of view on 1hz ticks
[07:45] <ascentior> I think sp loss was always a wierd and arbitrary penalty. For those that losing an expensive set up isn't a hard enough hit, they can afford the small (smaller thanks the the expensive implants that can equally afford) set back. For those where losing even a 500m cruiser is a big hit, they would also be set back further (less likely to be able to splash on training implant)
[07:45] <namamai> As for your C case, fozzie, there's one concern I do have in general about boosting modes. Small-gang fights, especially in FW, tend to be relatively short -- almost always under 2min, often under 1min. With the 10sec mode change, the usual mentality there is "start in sharpshooter or speed, apply tackle, then switch to tank." Then you stay in tank -- not necessarily because tank's the best (although it often is), but because there's not much point to worrying about switching out of tank, because half the fight will have ended before you can get back to another mode.
[07:45] <selto_black> The svipul does better with serpentis because with its base speed and sig it can mc hammer through most of the damage.
[07:45] <sardcaid> ohh, like stance fatigue, because holding your sword and shield funny is difficult
[07:45] <sardcaid> interesting
[07:45] <namamai> With larger fights, that's less of a concern -- but it's something to think about.
[07:45] <ccp_fozzie> @suitoniathat might get easier with BIAB, but I don't know for sur
[07:45] <sardcaid> maybe add a fatigue effect to mode swaps Kappa
[07:45] <namamai> uuuuugh
[07:45] <namamai> you wound me sard
[07:46] <syenna-celeste> someone actually suggested that earlier sard:neutral_face:
[07:46] <sardcaid> really though that's an interesting thought suitonia
[07:46] <johndrees> Yeah
[07:46] <syenna-celeste> yeah i'm a fan of the extra bonus idea that suitonia and hoodie have mentioned
[07:46] <ccp_fozzie> I'll post the CCP "questions to the group" inhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6084986#post6084986 [Focus Group] Tactical Destroyers: All four Tactical Destroyers have been out for a little while now and we're of course planning on making more adjustments to the class over the coming months. To help with this task we intend to put together a focus group on T3Ds that will help provide...
[07:46] <johndrees> Me :)
[07:46] <ccp_fozzie> another reason to keep an eye on that thread
[07:46] <sardcaid> can you keep those questions in the OP fozzie?
[07:47] <ccp_fozzie> yeah I'm putting them in the 3rd post after the Op atm
[07:47] <namamai> One downside to the decay idea -- it produces really unpredictable tanking
[07:47] <sardcaid> okay
[07:47] <ccp_fozzie> I reserved a bunch of slots in that thread
[07:47] <namamai> i.e. you can burst tank for a little bit, and then your tank starts dropping relative to the amount of fire coming in
[07:47] <selto_black> That's what I said namamai.
[07:48] <selto_black> It then becomes a race of who can get the lucky mode switch.
[07:48] <namamai> Plus, the modes would have to be longer to make something like that work. If a mode's bonus tapers off in ~10 seconds, for example, that means that you've gone from full bonus to no bonus in 3 cycles of a SAR / MASB
[07:48] <suitonia> What if it was 2 different effects then, I.E. Instead of always being 33% defensive mode resists, it could always be 20%, and you get a ln extra 20% for 5 seconds or something
[07:49] <suitonia> After hitting the mode swap
[07:49] <namamai> 5 seconds is one cycle of most weapons and frigate-sized tank modules:confused:You'd have to be PERFECT on your timing to see any benefit
[07:50] <syenna-celeste> So make it longer. But you can encourage a lot of clutch gameplay this way.
[07:50] <hoodie-mafia> Well the duration can be tweaked
[07:50] <selto_black> It also has a bad feel to it.
[07:50] <selto_black> The base mechanic seems gamey.
[07:50] <hoodie-mafia> If timed together with logi reps landing or remote reps overheated a brief bonus like that can be quite powerful while toning the overall bonus down
[07:51] <namamai> In general it seems like decay mechanics don't mix well with 1Hz ticks
[07:51] <selto_black> Well, more fantasy in nature.
[07:51] <namamai> Unless it's a very long decay (multiple minutes)
[07:51] <syenna-celeste> Decay is probably the wrong word. It's still a binary (you have this bonus or do not)
[07:51] <syenna-celeste> Not reducing per second like was mentioned briefly earlier.
[07:52] <namamai> On a practical side, too, keep in mind that this decay would have to be managed per ship -- that's a lot of work from a Dogma perspective, and one that BIAB may not be able to help with.
[07:52] <selto_black> What if you could overheat your modes? / only half serious.
[07:53] <hoodie-mafia> im sorry, BIAB?
[07:53] <syenna-celeste> Brain in a box
[07:54] <namamai> hoodie-mafia: Brain-in-a-Box -- it's an internal refactor of how effects and stats are calculated in Eve. Currently being tested on Sisi. Doesn't affect players directly atm, but it makes it a lot easier for CCP to implement certain types of effects.
[07:54] <hoodie-mafia> Ok thx
[07:54] <syenna-celeste> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=421522&find=unreadlink for the lazy/uninformed:simple_smile: EVE allows you to discover, explore and dominate an amazing science fiction universe while you fight, trade, form corporations and alliances with other players.
[07:56] <scipioartelius> Shared a file CCP Focus Group - Tactical Destroyers Document from Google DriveClick to open in GoogleDrive Add Comment
[07:57] <namamai> Re: Overheating modes. I find it really interesting, but how would they burn out?
[07:57] <scipioartelius> Just an initial draft at a structure to keep our various opinions/thoughts/reasoning on different issues in a single place
[07:57] <scipioartelius> Should be fairly self explanatory and anyone can edit the document. We can change the format later on if something else will work better
[07:57] <syenna-celeste> So thinking of applying damage bonuses to sharpshooter mode: I like the idea in theory, but it hits the Jackdaw harder than the other three.
[07:58] <namamai> I have a running concern of "let's not make T3Ds jacks of all trades" -- especially given their low entry cost in both SP and ISK. In many ways it's faster to train into T3Ds than T2 cruisers.
[07:58] <hoodie-mafia> I think stats need to be tweaked on the Svipul and the Confessor at the very least besides any changes made to modes
[07:58] <namamai> or T2 frigs.
[07:58] <hoodie-mafia> To bring them in line with the Hecate/Jackdaw
[07:58] <syenna-celeste> Yeah, the Svipul definitely needs to be made more mode reliant.
[07:58] <syenna-celeste> The Confessor is in a really weird spot and I'm not sure I'm qualified enough to comment on it. It's strong but not absurd.
[07:59] <hoodie-mafia> Thats just me assuming that the Confessor is also guilty of being too strong compared to the others besides the Svipul
[07:59] <johndrees> Well, the confessor is really strong at range but since the first nerf to t3d has been pretty average at brawling in my opinion.
[08:00] <hoodie-mafia> After the initial nerfs it was a lot better
[08:00] <hoodie-mafia> Before that it was stupidly overpowered at brawling
[08:00] <namamai> Take AFs, for example -- a new player needs ~20d of training to sit in a Harpy, iirc. Caldari Frigate V, and the prereqs for Assault Frigates I (Mechanics V, Power Grid Management V). But only 12d of training to sit in a Jackdaw: Caldari Frigate III, 9d for Caldari Destroyer I-V.
[08:01] <scipioartelius> I've included Mode Switching as the first topic, which was proposed by Chessur as a place we could perhaps start, but if anyone has any new major area to discuss, it can be taken into the next topic, etc.
[08:01] <hoodie-mafia> yes, because the T3Ds are role trained
[08:01] <hoodie-mafia> sorry, faction trained
[08:01] <namamai> The SP entry cost for T3Ds are absurdly low compared to AFs -- no support skills required.
[08:01] <hoodie-mafia> unlike the AF skill which counts for all 4 races
[08:02] <hoodie-mafia> I havnt done the math, but to fly all 4 T3Ds at good skills should take more time than to fly all AFs
[08:03] <namamai> It's basically 11d for the AF prereqs, and then 9d for each racial frigate.
[08:03] <sardcaid> A good rule of thumb for me is comparing T3s to what they're supposed to be doing, which is approximating the effects of specialist T2 hulls. That was the initial design for T3C, and T3D, while going beyond that paradigm, style ape other ships with their modes
[08:04] <sardcaid> With that in mind I like to compare the defense mode to a t2 ship with a normal 4% per level resist bonus, to other ships of the class for base HP and sig, to other ships in the class for damage bonuses and turret counts
[08:05] <sardcaid> I don't think that T3D in any mode should outdo a T2 or specialist ship at its trade, though it will be more adaptable at that role, while being less effective at the bleeding edge
[08:05] <syenna-celeste> There's a distinct lack of straight combat specialized T2 destroyers to use a benchmark.
[08:05] <sardcaid> that's true
[08:05] <syenna-celeste> You could use 'dictors but they have a very defined role.
[08:06] <sardcaid> closest thing you have is interdictors, which do approximate T3D in firepower, in a pinch
[08:06] <namamai> Yeah, that is true. We don't have general purpose T2 destroyers, other than maybe the sabre.
[08:06] <sardcaid> interdictors typically lack the projection despite having role based projection bonuses
[08:06] <namamai> As opposed to the Harpy which is simply a better Merlin
[08:07] <syenna-celeste> That's not really fair. All of the 'dictors do (or did) see straight combat use. But they're not exactly 'medium assault destroyers'
[08:07] <johndrees> @ccp_fozzie: What if the bonuses were related to module overheating? So for instance, you would get a damage bonus when in targeting mode but only if you were overheating the guns? The only precedence that exists in the game for an overheating bonus (as far as effect to how well it functions) is on deep space transports, but it's a pretty neat feature that may be fun for people to play with.
[08:07] <sardcaid> T3D have a heat bonus
[08:08] <sardcaid> just a flat reduction
[08:08] <johndrees> Not to effect
[08:08] <johndrees> I mean a bonus to how hard you hit or tank when in a particular mode but related to overheating
[08:08] <johndrees> Not how long you can do it.
[08:08] <namamai> Hmm, that is an interesting idea
[08:08] <sardcaid> I think that pigdeon holes pilots to a particular mode, though doesn't mean it's a bad thought
[08:09] <johndrees> Well it means that each mode is REALLY important for a particular task.
[08:09] <selto_black> What application would that serve for pve?
[08:09] <sardcaid> not much, as heat is very uncommon for PvE
[08:09] <selto_black> How would you compensate for the lack bonuses then?
[08:10] <sardcaid> it would be a flat nerf to PvE if you don't apply module heat
[08:10] <syenna-celeste> If you combine it with other things it might be an interesting idea. Reduce the base stats, and reduce the base bonus on the modes, but then give say sharpshooter "overheated turrets in sharpshooter mode gain triple the overheating effect"
[08:10] <syenna-celeste> Start using heat in pve, I guess? They have a heat damage reduction.
[08:10] <johndrees> Yeah, it would be a nerf to pve for sure.
[08:10] <johndrees> I like that syenna
[08:11] <sardcaid> heat is a very common thing for burner missions
[08:11] <selto_black> I'm of the opinion that eve pve is in need of a full rework anyway.
[08:12] <selto_black> Yes. Pve needs to be challenging and engaging.
[08:12] <selto_black> Look at warframe.
[08:12] <johndrees> I think an added benefit is that it would encourage active tanking (obviously you can't heat passive modules) which is one point where the svipul could be brought into line compared to the other t3d.
[08:13] <sardcaid> I don't see how bonuses from heated modules brings the svipul into line with other T3D
[08:13] <sardcaid> it's a very popular ship with active tank modules already
[08:13] <namamai> selto_black: Warframe may be a bad comparison, given the number of people who turn it into a blind farming game to compensate for DE's terrible RNG. (?*cough*speednova + excal + greedy mag*cough*?) Although I'd agree with PvE needing overhauling. That's probably a topic for a different focus group, though.
[08:13] <selto_black> True.
[08:14] <johndrees> Well if you encourage active tanking which utilizes cap (non-asb, obviously that's an issue) then you make the ship vulnerable to neuting which it is not currently.
[08:14] <sardcaid> Another thing to consider is that punishing players for fitting buffer modules, most typically for fleet work isn't a direction we should be really focusing on
[08:14] <selto_black> Or dark souls...
[08:14] <sardcaid> I'm reminded of some hurf blurf about this panel on reddit about making these ships solo pwn mobiles, or at least keeping them that way
[08:14] <selto_black> mutters about the silent majority
[08:15] <namamai> Yeah -- I want to see T3Ds as an option for large fleets alongside AFs or T1 cruisers.
[08:15] <sardcaid> I think it's important to point them out as options, not replacements, as well
[08:15] <johndrees> Well my point being that one of the biggest reasons that a brawling confessor isn't as dangerous as a brawling svipul is that if you neut the confessor out it actually effect\s the ship.
[08:16] <selto_black> So lets list all the types of ranking there are and which ships tank which ways.
[08:16] <johndrees> And I think the t3d being countered well by larger ships is a key to their balancing.
[08:16] <sardcaid> T3 ships are always going to be very valuable and attractive given their adaptability, but if a fleet decides to use T2 or faction ships for some specialist role, they should be rewarded, not punished for it
[08:17] <sardcaid> john I think the comparison between shield and armor tanks, coupled with projectile with energy turret ships stems more from the strengths and weaknesses of the weapons, and the relative overpowered effect of being able to fit more than one ASB
[08:17] <selto_black> Which is in itself a problem with long range weapons.
[08:17] <namamai> IDK about the ASB argument. Dual MASB hawks existed for long before T3Ds were implemented. (Admittedly, they're strong, but people have found counters to them.)
[08:18] <johndrees> Well the counter is that the hawk is slow lol.
[08:18] <johndrees> The svipul is really fast.
[08:18] <syenna-celeste> Which can be fixed by shifting some of its base speed into prop mode.
[08:18] <johndrees> Agreed
[08:19] <johndrees> And for added fun, shifting even more of it's speed into a benefit to heating:simple_smile:
[08:19] <syenna-celeste> A big part of the Svipul is that the base hull is relatively strong on its own. You could solve a lot of the problems with it just by shifting stats from base to modes.
[08:19] <sardcaid> ehhh I suggest reading into suitonia's analysis on confessor / svipul prop modes
[08:19] <syenna-celeste> Have you got a link? I skim read it a while ago but I don't remember much of it.
[08:20] <sardcaid> Pinned a message.See all pinned items in this channel. suitonia Yes. I have a lot to say about this, at work for 4 hours but I will post it when I get back Oct 8th at 5:27 PM
[08:20] <namamai> @ccp_fozzie: Does CCP have an idea of where they want damage projection to be for T3Ds with long range weapons? 20km, 50km, 80km?
[08:20] <sardcaid> he points out the flaws of using base velocity buff in the prop mode bonus
[08:21] <sardcaid> What do you think their projection should be in sniper mode
[08:21] <selto_black> I agree the base vel buff needs to be removed.
[08:21] <selto_black> It scales wayyy too well in black holes.
[08:22] <selto_black> And with implants/drugs/links.....
[08:22] <selto_black> It just scales too effectively
[08:23] <syenna-celeste> I'm kind of torn on the idea of giving everyone the MWD bonus. My head says yes, solves all the problems. My heart says ugh, no variety.
[08:23] <namamai> sardcaid: I'm not actually sure what feels right here. Svipul maxes out around 15km for close range ammo and 30km for LR. Confessor's 30km for close range, 80km+ for LR. Jackdaw's shooting out to 70-80km. My gut says 80km is too far for a multitasker hull; I don't want to see a Harpy 2.0.
[08:24] <selto_black> Now if the bonus was additive instead of multiplicative.(or vise versa if I have these backwards) it wouldn't be near as powerful.
[08:25] <selto_black> My head says that pve applications will suffer if forced to use a mwd.
[08:26] <selto_black> My heart says : gottagofast!
[08:26] <sardcaid> I would think a middle of the road bonus between super LR specialists and single porjection bonused ships is a good place to start
[08:27] <sardcaid> so if harpies /corms have 2x 10% range boni, consider something like 2x 7.5% range boni
[08:27] <sardcaid> so on
[08:28] <sardcaid> T3D should be breaking the mold in that they can chose between bonuses on the fly, not that their bonuses are equal to or greater than specialist hulls
[08:29] <sardcaid> I think in some cases they should match T2 ships, in tank/gank areas, they shouldn't exceed
[08:29] <namamai> ^^ agreed.
[08:31] <namamai> I think that works well with the idea of moving damage into sharpshooter mode, too.
[08:32] <sardcaid> I haven't thought a lot on it, but it makes sense
[08:32] <sardcaid> In my eyes defensive more should be more about survival and tackling than brawling
[08:33] <sardcaid> It'd be interesting to split the damage bonus between base hull and sharpshooter as well
[08:33] <namamai> ?*nod*?Defense is the default brawling mode, and that's probably worth changing, especially in the svipul's case.(edited)
[08:33] <syenna-celeste> Putting all of the damage bonus into sharpshooter would be a mistake. Most of them would be actually alright if you just took the per t3d level bonus into sharpshooter.
[08:34] <sardcaid> well it's nice to at least give players the option to use sharpshooter to kill something quickly at close range, rather than default to defense
[08:34] <syenna-celeste> The Jackdaw with Rockets is the exception.
[08:35] <sardcaid> I agree that all of the damage bonus into sharp shooter makes sharpshooter too potent
[08:35] <namamai> Yep -- splitting seems appropriate.
[08:57] <selto_black> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EitZRLt2G3w YouTube Extra Credits Balancing for Skill - The Link from Optimal Power to Strategy - Extra Credits
[09:05] <johndrees> So, Svipul = noob tube = temporary strategy for noob pilots?
[09:06] <selto_black> yet so vastly op when put in the hands of skilled players
[09:06] <hoodie-mafia> no thats the Ishtar
[09:06] <selto_black> *was the nerfedtar
[09:06] <selto_black> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVL4st0blGU YouTube Extra Credits Depth vs Complexity - Why More Features Don't Make a Better Game - Extra Credits
[09:09] <namamai> That's actually correct IMO for the buffer Svipul. Very easy to fly (esp when compared to most armor brawlers who have to dualrep). Better players use the same fit, but just execute better.
[09:14] <johndrees> Indeed, the ship has a small number of things to manage when compared to active tanked or kiting ships.
[09:14] <gorski_car> Has there been any thoughts about changing how swapping from speed mode to another mode lets you pretty much insta warp?
[09:14] <selto_black> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlBR1z-ue-I YouTube Extra Credits Differences in Scale vs Differences in Kind - Keeping Players Interested - Extra Credits
[09:14] <sfm_hobb3s> @namamai, at least the hecate and confessor are both VERY useable in large fleets if they are used as a sniping platform. That's where I've had my success. You can snipe or drive off tackle, use your probes to your advantage to warp to optimal on ewar frigs and the like. But you really have to fly it carefully. Trying to be an f1 button pusher is bound to get you killed. You have to sort by distance, keep a close eye on whats near you, watch out for the main enemy fleet targeting you (you are about to get blapped). The key is like sniping in R/L. Shoot. Relocate. And by this I mean warping to a ping a few hundred clicks off the battle, and then warping back to something again. Now. Jackdaw sniper (lml). Useless in big fleets. The delayed dps kills and buries this hull. In the time my confessor has fired off two volleys and popped a crucifier at 80km, the first missile volley has not even hit its target. The target is going to get away. And the tumours metastisize when you add TIDI.
[09:15] <namamai> I don't think buffer is the inherent problem, though, so much as it is the amount of regen and the fact that Svipul doesn't need sharpshooter mode to apply solid DPS at 500-1500m.
[09:15] <sfm_hobb3s> I should add, using these in big fleets has been extremely fun, although tough.
[09:16] <namamai> sfm_hobb3s: Agreed, jackdaw could probably use a stronger +vel (and a matching -flighttime) penalty. But at that point we're talking more about the general mechanics of missiles.
[09:17] <sfm_hobb3s> yep...most missiles not in a great place:wink:poor heavies
[09:17] <namamai> (FWIW, I think missile travel time needs to be rethought now that we're adding missile TDs to the game. But that's a topic for another group.)
[09:17] <sardcaid> which is odd to hear, given how often I hear about cereberus fleets being a common thing
[09:17] <syenna-celeste> RLMLs are the big exception.
[09:19] <namamai> sardcaid: It's something painful at small fleet size. It's not that bad for larger setpiece battles where warpouts may mean losing an objective.
[09:19] <sfm_hobb3s> I'll tell you one of the funniest things that happened in a big fleet flying a confessor...back in BL two or so months ago we caught a goon super fleet with a couple titans in fountain. Goons were losing the battle, we destroyed the titans and anumber of supers, and one of the last ships of theirs to die before we extracted was a revelation. For some crazy reason he decided to primary me, and I thought what the heck. He blaps me I will laugh. He fired, and the beam just enveloped my whole ship. Did 0 damage though lol.
[09:19] <namamai> (Which is one reason among many why Goons use HML tengus as their primary doctrine for sov war.)
[09:20] <sardcaid> game mechanics vs realism is pretty amusing sfm
[09:20] <sardcaid> on the flip side I vividly recall tracking titans nearly one shotting an active tanked myrm of mine a few years back
[09:21] <sardcaid> at 100+km
[09:21] <sardcaid> anyway, I think all this segways well into chatting about application for these ships
[09:22] <sardcaid> so currently T3Ds have tremendously potent damage output potential as a class, but little in the way of application bonuses
[09:22] <johnnytwelvebore> Some sort of delay would cover that aspect?
[09:22] <sardcaid> I think this is a good thing to maintain
[09:23] <namamai> Anyways. Back to fozzie's questions -- I think more frequent mode switches would definitely make for more interesting play, but I suspect that most fits will still end up picking a single mode as their ideal one. i.e. a sniper Confessor would be "stick in sharpshooter mode by default, go to def or prop as necessary." There's plenty of room to add skill requirements in knowing when/why to change modes... but I think most fits will still have a mode in mind as the default.
[09:23] <namamai> Especially for sniper setups.
[09:23] <namamai> Brawlers will see more of the flexibility.
[09:23] <namamai> (Arguably, I think brawling is where T3Ds need the most work.)
[09:23] <sardcaid> suitonia was pointing out earlier how T3Ds with velocity bonuses in the propulsion mode don't much need tracking bonuses to apply, and while I agree that velocity bonus should go, or be severely reduced, I like player positioning and direction dictating whether or not a high damage output T3D will hit.
[09:24] <sardcaid> Once upon a time AS were similar in this regard, in that most did not have tracking bonuses, or had limited midslots and thus lacked webifiers
[09:24] <sardcaid> it was an interesting and fun tradeoff that rewarded heavily player positioning and piloting
[09:25] <sardcaid> @namamai: as long as we keep to strong modes and weaker base hull attributes, I think that mode switching even for specialist fits will be a thing
[09:26] <scipioartelius> Morning all
[09:26] <sardcaid> it is just a matter of deciding on what balanced bonuses on mode switches are and are not
[09:26] <sardcaid> good morning@scipioartelius
[09:26] <gorski_car> finally home from work
[09:26] <sardcaid> hey gorski
[09:27] <sardcaid> regarding your article on all this business@gorski_car, do you think ghat T3D should even have a sensor strength boni from sharpshooter?
[09:27] <gorski_car> Honestly I am not a big fan of it
[09:27] <sardcaid> sorry, sensor resolution
[09:27] <sardcaid> not strength
[09:27] <gorski_car> would prefer a bigger eccm/locking range
[09:28] <gorski_car> then again a lot of people enjoy the mass insta arty svipul gameplay
[09:28] <gorski_car> I am not a fan of gate camps in general
[09:28] <sardcaid> I don't see why the mode should improve your lock time personally, you're already a dessie hull with decent sensor res
[09:29] <namamai> Yeah, in general I'm not a fan of the sensor res bonus on sharpshooter modes. (sensor strength / lock range, otoh, is just fine, and maybe could be a bit better on some of them)
[09:29] <sardcaid> I don't think scan res damps are a common thing vs smaller ships, and you can still achieve silly lock times with RSB or SB on a T3D, requires more sacrifice which in my eyes is fine
[09:30] <sfm_hobb3s> Having three modes is ideal in my opinion, once you add more there is a greater risk of accidents lol. I do actually switch modes frequently. Prop mode when I'm travelling with the fleets or moving around in battle (getting lined up for my next warpout etc), I only switch to sniper mode when I am ready to fire. And when I get tackled...well, then I switch to armor mode, overheat all the things, and hope I can kill the tackler in time before I am primaried myself:simple_smile:
[09:30] <namamai> I'm one of the rare people who thinks instalocking camps are okay -- but I think you should have to invest in it (RSBs, etc) rather than just every T3D being a fast tackler.
[09:30] <namamai> (And, conversely, making instawarp something you have to invest in -- at least one agility mod/rig -- rather than just being the default for most T3Ds.)
[09:30] <sardcaid> how does everyone feel about confessor / svipul having 2x utility highs?
[09:31] <gorski_car> It's not hardly a investment to bring a rsebo heron nama
[09:31] <gorski_car> I think it's cool that they have 2 utility highs
[09:31] <namamai> It's still a second account logged in.
[09:32] <gorski_car> It's not really easy to get dual neuts on a svipul
[09:32] <gorski_car> you need to drop 2 rigs for that
[09:32] <namamai> Confessor, I'm okay with, given that its cap profile encourages nos and discourages neuts. Svipul, I'm not so sure on -- neut fits are pretty powerful given the ship's engagement envelope, but it means you have to give up some things.
[09:33] <gorski_car> http://puu.sh/kDjxC/ea1ac385a3.png(85KB)
[09:33] <namamai> That said, don't forget, nos/neut tiericide is coming. Some things may change here.(edited)
[09:33] <syenna-celeste> The svipul and confessor fits I've trended towards haven't actually used the utlity highs.
[09:33] <gorski_car> That's pretty much the cookie cutter dual neut version
[09:33] <sfm_hobb3s> you might laugh but I have no room on my confessor for neither neut or nos, so i have a small remote armor rep there. I get lots of props in small gangs or shield gangs having that lol
[09:34] <gorski_car> yeah they are not exactly easy to get on
[09:35] <sardcaid> At worst vs 5 guns it's much better for heat management on the ship, more slots as sinks. At best it makes the ships (especially the svipul) more versatile that I feel it deserves to be
[09:35] <namamai> Gorski: I actually run something similar but with armor and 150s instead -- fewer fitting mods, and scram/web makes it a lot easier to stay in neut range.
[09:35] <scipioartelius> Well the RR confessor works well, so it a good use of the utility slot tbh. We have been running small gangs with dual remote reps and as a group, it works great
[09:35] <sardcaid> I don't think it's something to really aggressively look at or punish though
[09:36] <gorski_car> the deadspace sb fit scales insanely with links
[09:36] <selto_black> can i get that rr fessor fit?
[09:36] <gorski_car> also the heatsink thingy isn't that big of ad eal sard
[09:36] <gorski_car> they already have a heat bonus on the ship
[09:36] <gorski_car> and you rarely burn out in a fight
[09:37] <scipioartelius> Yeah sure. On my phone at the moment on the way to work, but will send it when I get to the office
[09:37] <selto_black> ty
[09:37] <namamai> The reason I ask -- we know that neuts are going to be getting falloff. Depending on where they pick those ranges, that could mean that cap warfare starts becoming valuable at 8-10km, instead of the current 6km. In that case, option highs become more important
[09:38] <ccp_fozzie> set the channel purpose:Main Channel for the Tactical Destroyer focus group. Forum thread at: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=449910 Remember: Everything said in this channel will be made available to the public.
[09:39] <gorski_car> http://puu.sh/kDjW3/c89ff6bca1.png(83KB) made this in 10 sec
[09:39] <ccp_fozzie> Morning folks
[09:39] <gorski_car> alternate scram and webs in your fleet ofc
[09:41] <syenna-celeste> 'eyy
[09:43] <scipioartelius> [Confessor, brawler rr] Damage Control II Heat Sink II Heat Sink II 200mm Rolled Tungsten Compact Plates Micro Auxiliary Power Core II 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Initiated Harmonic Warp Scrambler I Small Focused Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S Small Focused Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S Small Focused Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S Small Focused Beam Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S Coreli A-Type Small Remote Armor Repairer Coreli A-Type Small Remote Armor Repairer Small Processor Overclocking Unit I Small Processor Overclocking Unit I Small Anti-Thermic Pump I
[09:43] <scipioartelius> That's what we use, splitting half ships with scram as above and half with long point
[09:44] <syenna-celeste> Surprised you can get away with the 200 plate.
[09:45] <scipioartelius> Yep, works fine. We haven't lost a ship flying like this yet
[09:45] <scipioartelius> Killed plenty
[09:46] <scipioartelius> Whoever gets primaries switches instantly to defence mode and with everyone else providing reps it holds up well
[09:46] <scipioartelius> ?*primaried*?
[10:01] <johndrees> I know some members of fountain core who were doing the same with svipuls to great effect.
[10:05] <scipioartelius> Yes, we have setups for the Svipul and Hecate as well but tend to fly the Confessor for this mostly. Occasionally we run mixed fleets, but the speed differences require a lot of attention for everyone to stay in rep range
[10:05] <chessur> O/ fozzie
[10:07] <scipioartelius> Was lots of discussion while I was asleep. Still reading to catch up
[10:07] <fintarue> Catching up with the conversation. I believe Syenna mentioned it, but part of the reason the Svipul is so strong is because of the difference in fitting between AC and Arty. Arty svipuls are fast, but their tank is light and reasonable. When you have extra PG because AC fitting is so low then you get crazy with the tank, on an already fast and high dps ship. I think we can all agree that one of the main fits that most people complain about is the double MSE brawler. 20k EHP 3k/s and 400+ dps
[10:07] <suitonia> Arty Svipul is OP too because of the speed mode
[10:08] <suitonia> with defensive web you track Scram/Web Interceptors on top of you orbit 500
[10:08] <johndrees> We certainly are producing a lot of text. Maybe someone should take the core ideas from the discussion and keep them in a Google doc list? That way we don't continue to rediscover the same ideas.
[10:08] <johndrees> @suitoniawhat would you think of trading the tracking bonus for an optimal range bonus on the svipul in targeting mode?
[10:09] <suitonia> it already has optimal on the hull
[10:09] <suitonia> unless you intend to swap them
[10:09] <syenna-celeste> Or double it up I guess?
[10:09] <suitonia> double optimal would be potentially broken though, and not very useful for ACs
[10:09] <syenna-celeste> Falloff bonus on sharpshooter to encourage AC fits to actually use it?
[10:10] <johndrees> Yeah, that might be cool.
[10:11] <fintarue> Responding to Suitonia's post on the Hecate balance, I agree that the ship is probably the ideal balance for how it's speed and other modes work. Because of the naturally low base speed, tighter fitting, and speed mode, Oversized Props don't benefit the ship nearly as much. This has another benefit of making the ship less likely to decimate ships a class or two larger. Even though it's defense mode is incredibly strong, and I love, it takes almost full damage because of it's slow speed and tendency to be MWD fit. Cruisers do well against the hecate, even though the hecate has a solid chance against them in return
[10:12] <namamai> This is looping back to the earlier rant about arty fittings, but yeah.
[10:12] <namamai> And agreed, the Hecate feels good.
[10:12] <suitonia> Optimal/Falloff bonuses on ACs/Artys could potentially use some work too
[10:12] <suitonia> as optimal bonuses are trash for ACs
[10:12] <suitonia> like on Jaguar for example
[10:12] <fintarue> I'd hate to see the svipul get an extra range bonus. Part of my concern with some of the t3d is that they project high dps out way past cruisers likely do.
[10:13] <suitonia> I agree with Fintarue I think there is more reason to use Sharpshooter mode if Speed mode base speed is lowered
[10:13] <suitonia> as well
[10:13] <fintarue> Confessor does upwards of 300 dps out at 70k, Hecate can do that at 90k, and Jackdaw hits stupid far out. Arty svipul has a far more reasonable balance, aside from being fast
[10:13] <suitonia> because right now speed mode gives more tracking
[10:13] <fintarue> Agreed
[10:13] <suitonia> due to reletive traversal and being able to mitigate more angular velocity
[10:14] <fintarue> All of the other t3d have range while in sharp. The svipul doesn't, which encourages it to sit in speed mode at all times
[10:14] <suitonia> an Arty Svipul with defensive web vs Scram+web MWD slasher (the fastest and lowest base sig frig in the game) tracks it perfectly with speed mode, while has issues in sharpshooter mode
[10:14] <suitonia> that shouldn't be the case
[10:15] <suitonia> it should be the opposite
[10:15] <fintarue> I think the hecate is the most well balance of the 4, and could be used as a model for looking at the other 3
[10:15] <johndrees> What if you remove the svipuls inherent optimal range bonus and replaced it with a bonus similar to the reload bonus on the jackdaw.
[10:16] <suitonia> I don't think the optimal bonus is really a concern
[10:16] <suitonia> I honestly believe 90% of the problems with T3D are propulsion mode related
[10:16] <syenna-celeste> The optimal bonus is necessary for artillery to work at all. Of all the things wrong with the svipul the range is probably the only thing that isn't really out of whack
[10:17] <fintarue> Agreed Syenna
[10:17] <johndrees> I'm not saying remove it completely I'm saying apply it to the targeting mode.
[10:17] <fintarue> That would line up well with the other 3 t3d John, and encourage more mode swapping in the svipul
[10:17] <johndrees> That way you can't just run around and speed mode with artis blasting off any small ships it likes
[10:17] <johndrees> .
[10:18] <syenna-celeste> You'd achieve the same thing by copy-pasting the Hecate's MWD bonus onto it and calling it a day.
[10:18] <fintarue> I also have concerns with the confessor/jackdaw/svipul tanking as well, but it's not necessarily a defense mode issue
[10:18] <syenna-celeste> Hard tackle should be a hard thing to get rid of, given how well you're able to get rid of it while it's still at range.
[10:19] <fintarue> It's one thing to have a strong tank, but bigger ships struggle to apply damage to them. Straight up misses, or in the jackdaw case being able to brute force tank way too high
[10:19] <syenna-celeste> The Jackdaw's facetank is insanely broken, and only gets more broken the more money you throw at it.
[10:19] <syenna-celeste> I should not be able to tank 1500dps in a destroyer hull.
[10:20] <suitonia> The jackdaw gets tracked perfectly by every cruiser weapon system in the game though, and does below average DPS
[10:20] <syenna-celeste> The Jackdaw needs to deal more damage with rockets.
[10:20] <suitonia> I think the DPS is fine
[10:20] <johndrees> Maybe not but at least in that case you could be energy neutralized and still killed
[10:20] <syenna-celeste> But its tank is?_way_?too strong.
[10:21] <fintarue> But the ability for it to tank 1200+ with no effort is too much. I think the jackdaw should lose a mid. This would also mitigate some of the crazy 120km sniper jackdaws
[10:21] <syenna-celeste> But that might be an artifact of crystals and links more than anything else.
[10:21] <namamai> The active tank on the Jackdaw is fantastic -- but it's actually not that good in buffer fits.
[10:21] <namamai> Yeah, that's crystals/links you're dealing with
[10:22] <johndrees> Good morning
[10:22] <suitonia> Links are completely broken and probably beyond the scope of this discussion
[10:22] <fintarue> Agreed
[10:22] <johndrees> Yeah I bet most people in here agree that links are broken.
[10:22] <namamai> Case in point -- GSF has a Jackdaw doctrine right now, buffer fit. It's 17k ish in defensive mode, 11k-ish in sharpshooter? That's tiny compared to Svipul, or even 200mm Confessors.
[10:22] <syenna-celeste> To an extent yes. But I've spent a lot of time comparing similar fits on similar hulls and the Jackdaw is an outlier in terms of how much raw EHP/S it can restore.
[10:23] <suitonia> Making the Jackdaw 5/3 would help solve DPS issues and curtail it's tank
[10:23] <suitonia> if you believe it's an issue
[10:23] <fintarue> Also severe range in sharp
[10:23] <suitonia> instead of 6/2
[10:23] <syenna-celeste> I'd support that change.
[10:23] <fintarue> 5/3 would put it in like with the flycatcher, while giving it an a slot advantage for damage, or the ability to make up for it's abysmal speed
[10:24] <fintarue> I think that's a solid change
[10:24] <namamai> suitonia: The flipside would be that Rocketdaws are more dependent on a web for application than the other three platforms. Most Rocketdaws these days are propmod, scram/web, and a 3 slot tank.
[10:24] <syenna-celeste> Added a Plain Text snippet:For reference. [Jackdaw, Olga: Final Form] Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System Damage Control II Gistii A-Type 5MN Microwarpdrive Pithum B-Type Medium Shield Booster Shadow Serpentis Warp Scrambler Pith A-Type Shield Boost Amplifier Imperial Navy Small Capacitor Booster, Navy Cap Booster 400 Imperial Navy Small Capacitor Booster, Navy Cap Booster 400 Add Comment Click to expand inline23 lines
[10:24] <johndrees> I'd be in favor of that
[10:24] <syenna-celeste> This is the shit that I mean.
[10:24] <fintarue> Those are the same ones that still tank in the realm of stupid
[10:25] <namamai> If you're going to 5 mids, that brings you down to a 2 slot tank -- you've gotta fit a suitcase (which doesn't quite make up for the loss), in which case you're still anemic DPS.
[10:25] <forsot> sviples can tank in the range of stupid with some bling so 3 slots of tank is alot
[10:25] <syenna-celeste> Rocket DPS with 2 BCUs is fine.
[10:25] <fintarue> Except that it's common to see jackdaws with 1bcu and DC
[10:26] <fintarue> which means you'd do 2 BCU and a DC
[10:26] <namamai> ... You only have two modules on that entire fit that aren't faction, and some of which are extremely high value. That's easily a 1bil jackdaw. If you're willing to throw that much ridiculous pimp at a hull, guess what, it's going to be fantastic.
[10:26] <fintarue> Putting rocket jackdaws up to around 300 dps
[10:26] <namamai> Most fits aren't that absurd.
[10:26] <syenna-celeste> ~600mil, Namamai.
[10:26] <suitonia> I think tank/DPS would be fine with 2x BCU/DC and mwd/scram/web/MSE/MASB or something similar
[10:26] <syenna-celeste> Added a Plain Text snippet:Same effect, ~130mil [Jackdaw, JACKINOFFDAW] Damage Control II Ballistic Control System II 5MN Microwarpdrive II Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Warp Scrambler II Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Small Capacitor Booster II, Navy Cap Booster 400 Shield Boost Amplifier II Add Comment Click to expand inline23 lines
[10:27] <syenna-celeste> Basically it scales far too well with a trivial amount of money. -1 mid +1 low solves so many problems.
[10:27] <gorski_car> yeah johnny a delay would sort that issue out nicely
[10:27] <suitonia> I kind of think it makes sense that it would be a mirror of the Confessor anyway
[10:27] <suitonia> in terms of mids/lows
[10:27] <suitonia> since hecate and svipul are mirrors
[10:27] <fintarue> Agreed, falls in line well with the ship concepts
[10:27] <johndrees> Yep
[10:29] <namamai> Still -- that's 600M+ of modules (110M boost amp, 150M shield booster, 100M BCS, 50M MWD, 120M scram) on a 30M hull. That's more an argument that those modules, or the way the hull bonuses scale them, need to be fixed; not "midslots are OP."
[10:30] <namamai> (Also, I'm actually skeptical that people don't just run away from that shit. Rocket application without a web is awful.)
[10:31] <syenna-celeste> 250 for 0, what can I say.
[10:31] <syenna-celeste> It's far tankier than it has any right to be. But the damage is bad. Solution as above, one more low plx.
[10:31] <fintarue> The anemic dps means most brawling jackdaws end up having some expensive gear on it so people can live long enough to kill something
[10:32] <fintarue> Swapping a mid to a low would add damage, while forcing people to choose on the tank or application
[10:32] <selto_black> why do rockets apply so poorly?
[10:32] <namamai> I mean, we're talking a feedback loop here. Jackdaw's DPS is anemic, agreed; so, people go absurd on the tank in order to kill things with it. But if you raise the gank and nerf the base tank at the same time, you're still in the same spot.
[10:33] <selto_black> i havent trained missiles...
[10:33] <namamai> I like the idea of a 6/5/3 daw, but I'd really want to see a little more buffer on it to compensate for the loss of an invuln
[10:33] <fintarue> How so? The concern we have is that the jackdaw tanks too much, dropping a mid cuts that problem, and helps the issue with poor dps. It's not circular
[10:34] <namamai> selto_black: Rockets have an exceptionally low explosion velocity -- imagine torps, scaled down to frigate size. Most T1 frigates can speedtank them without using a propmod at all, just by slowboating in a straight line.
[10:34] <fintarue> And forget t2 rockets without having a larger target or double web on a frigate
[10:35] <namamai> For that reason, it's generally pretty risky to use rockets without pairing them with a web -- or something else to compensate (i.e. Crash boosters, hardwires, etc)
[10:35] <selto_black> Huh. that seems like a design oversite for a close range weapon.
[10:35] <fintarue> Might as well spit at em
[10:35] <namamai> Not really -- in exchange for that mechanic, they don't have the tracking concerns of turrets.
[10:35] <namamai> I wish rockets applied a bit better, but they're not entirely broken.
[10:35] <selto_black> but compared to lml's better application?
[10:35] <fintarue> They're definitely not in the worst spot.
[10:35] <namamai> Still wouldn't want to brawl without a web, though.
[10:36] <fintarue> lmls apply very poorly compared to rockets honestly
[10:36] <johndrees> If they applied well they would out class a lot of small turrets in range and dps output. They aren't all that unbalanced you just have to fit to manage one of their drawbacks.
[10:36] <selto_black> Huh.
[10:36] <fintarue> Rockets are definitly in a better spot now than they have previously
[10:36] <johndrees> Meaning, bring a web.
[10:36] <syenna-celeste> Or friends. Or both.
[10:37] <johndrees> Yeah
[10:37] <johndrees> All good there.
[10:37] <selto_black> I should stop trying to draw from experiences fighting Orthruses
[10:37] <namamai> Remember, there's larger fleets using Jackdaws (and other T3s) too. I happen to agree that Jackdaws have very nice active tanks, and probably need to be nerfed... but don't do it in a way that obsoletes buffer fits too. I like 5/3, if the base EHP is raised a bit to compensate.
[10:37] <johndrees> I still like the 6/5/3 layout.
[10:37] <fintarue> Pretty similar to lasers. Without a web you may struggle to apply almost any damage
[10:38] <fintarue> An extra low could potentially help with that buffer, no? It'd allow for a MAPC cutting down on current routers for more buffer rigs or resist rigs
[10:38] <fintarue> And wouldn't sacrifice dps or dcu at all
[10:39] <fintarue> God knows it has cpu for days, and with one less mid it'd be fine there still
[10:39] <forsot> with the new missle mods it would give you the option for cap/appliction/lessor tank buff/damage
[10:40] <forsot> vs ewar/tank/application
[10:40] <fintarue> Definitely cannot forget about those application mods
[10:40] <forsot> oh also nano
[10:49] <johndrees> I think it would be very common to see, dcu, bcu, nano as the lowslots for the jackdaw if it had 3 lows.
[10:49] <forsot> ya
[10:49] <forsot> im just looking on pyfa what the missle low would do for application in comparison to a web
[10:50] <namamai> Probably dcu/bcu/overdrive instead.
[10:50] <namamai> It's already absurdly agile.
[10:51] <forsot> the big downside is lost cargo on active tanked ones tho
[10:51] <fintarue> I fit an overdrive, it still fits 30 cap boosters
[10:51] <fintarue> and ammo
[10:51] <syenna-celeste> You can fit an absurd amount of cap boosters.
[10:51] <namamai> Yeah, Jackdaw has cargo space for days
[10:51] <syenna-celeste> It's not a problem to lose some.
[10:51] <johndrees> That's true, overdrive works.
[10:51] <namamai> You lose very little with an OD
[10:52] <selto_black> Added and commented on a Plain Text snippet:C5 Wolf rayet fleet fit [Confessor, C5 WR] Federation Navy 400mm Steel Plates Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Micro Auxiliary Power Core II Co-Processor II Heat Sink II Warp Scrambler II Warp Scrambler II 1 Comment Click to expand inline21 lines http://puu.sh/kDo8H/f86c344605.png
[10:53] <selto_black> this is how well the confessor scales within a wr. what seems most broken here is the 23m sig
[10:53] <fintarue> I don't understand the double scram and 1mn ab
[10:53] <namamai> What's the value of the dual scram? (Sorry, I'm not accustomed to WH PvE.)
[10:53] <gorski_car> draws aggro
[10:53] <selto_black> yep.
[10:53] <selto_black> also
[10:53] <fintarue> Oh WH fit, yes, the sig is one of my concerns with the tanking of the confessor and svipul.
[10:54] <selto_black> you can switch it for a web no problem
[10:54] <selto_black> for pvp
[10:54] <fintarue> It makes big ships apply lmost no damage
[10:54] <selto_black> gets 35k tank and great resists which make it stupid tanky
[10:54] <forsot> before un.bound riped we ran arty svipls in our home WR they do scary things
[10:55] <fintarue> How concerned are we with how they perform in WH though? Is it limited to Wolf?
[10:55] <fintarue> The t3d are a good means for new players to get into c1 and c2 and make solid money fairly early
[10:56] <hoodie-mafia> I think a delay would actually solve more things, as it means you need to guess in advance if you are going to need a different mode
[10:56] <selto_black> im using this as a poor mans explination of links/drugs/implants
[10:56] <fintarue> rgr
[10:56] <selto_black> generally if its broken in a particular wormhole
[10:57] <selto_black> its broken when you factor those things in
[10:57] <syenna-celeste> C13 WRs are?_supposed_?to be a bit broken though, aren't they?
[10:57] <syenna-celeste> That's kind of the point isn't it?
[10:58] <selto_black> the problem is that im almost able to run REGULAR C3 sites with the confessor
[10:58] <selto_black> it takes forever
[10:58] <selto_black> but its almost do able
[10:58] <forsot> we ran them in a c5 WR and would win against equal number t3 cruisers with logi if ppl brodcast properly
[10:58] <selto_black> i just lack a few skills and a bit of elite piloting skills
[10:59] <forsot> in a fleet meta they are vary squishy even with wr buffs tho
[11:02] <fintarue> c2 are easily doable for a confessor, and are a great source of some early income for a newbie
[11:02] <fintarue> Which is what I always recommend to our new guys
[11:02] <selto_black> Oh yes
[11:02] <selto_black> good
[11:03] <selto_black> it gets them exposed to different kinds of space different mechanics and makes them isk
[11:03] <selto_black> http://puu.sh/kDoEj/e73ed9bcca.png(75KB)
[11:03] <selto_black> that is with x-instinct and sleipnir links
[11:03] <selto_black> 14m sig
[11:03] <fintarue> Well considering we live in low, it's also rough to ask a new player to live in low without having an income source, c1/c2 are one of the best means
[11:04] <selto_black> i totally agree
[11:04] <fintarue> That goes back to, is the ship itself broke or is the links broke?
[11:04] <selto_black> and then you run into a c13 and make bank
[11:04] <fintarue> The sig is pretty low on it's own, but links make about anything stupid
[11:04] <forsot> you cant have links in a c13....
[11:04] <selto_black> eh thats me being a bit hyperbolic >.>
[11:05] <fintarue> That sig is pretty close to doable even not in a c13
[11:05] <selto_black> and considering that the lowest weapon sig is on rockets and that its lower than that?
[11:06] <fintarue> once you get to that point, even webbed to hell it'll take no real damage
[11:06] <fintarue> or atleast easily tankable when active
[11:07] <namamai> Yeah, I'd like to see a little more sig radius -- although more bluntly I'd just love to see EM links removed from game
[11:07] <fintarue> But we're seeing similar stuff with them now against cruiser before getting silly. The sig is too small for cruisers to apply much at all
[11:09] <forsot> links in the current state are bad but forced on grid they have interesting game play in a fleet setting
[11:09] <fintarue> Let's try and avoid that conversation
[11:10] <scipioartelius> hey Fozzie
[11:10] <scipioartelius> hey all
[11:11] <scipioartelius> https://ccpfocusgroups.slack.com/archives/tactical-destroyers/p1444297129000326 CCP Fozzieccp_fozzie @ccp_fozzieset the channel purpose: Main Channel for the Tactical Destroyer focus group. Forum thread at: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=449910 Remember: Everything said in this channel will be made available to the public. Oct 8th at 9:38 AM
[11:11] <scipioartelius> I'll put it out there that for me, there isn't anything particularly OP about that aspect and it is one of the unique things about T3D that makes them fun. I don't see a need to change that personally
[11:12] <scipioartelius> wrong copy
[11:12] <scipioartelius> https://ccpfocusgroups.slack.com/archives/tactical-destroyers/p1444295686000324 gorski_car Has there been any thoughts about changing how swapping from speed mode to another mode lets you pretty much insta warp? Oct 8th at 9:14 AM
[11:12] <scipioartelius> that one
[11:12] <scipioartelius> too late
[11:17] <syenna-celeste> It's something that's annoying to deal with but it isn't such a pressing issue as the 'svipul scourge'.
[11:18] <syenna-celeste> And the Jackdaw/Hecate are both capable of the fabled <2seconds into warp just by sitting in propulsion mode, so there isn't even any 'skill' (not that it's a difficult thing to do) involved.
[11:20] <syenna-celeste> ?_that said_?, putting a delay on mode switches would make the decision to change modes more meaningful and might be a big deal with other changes that were spitballed earlier/elsewhere. But if a delay is put in there definitely needs to be some kind of obvious visual showing when the new bonuses come into effect, or maybe the transition could be staggered over the whole ~10 second animation/cooldown?
[11:21] <forsot> also the missile guidance low on the jackdaw is mostly useless compared to a web it only adds about 11% vs near 100% increase using rage rockets with a web
[11:21] <syenna-celeste> Just having it suddenly kick in after a delay would be super clunky.
[11:21] <fintarue> Don't use rage
[11:22] <fintarue> There's no helping rage without a double web
[11:22] <syenna-celeste> Should probably also clarify above about the <2 second into warp of the jdaw and hecate: This is probably too powerful and makes travelling in lowsec virtually risk free for zero effort or penalty.
[11:22] <fintarue> even with nothing but application mods
[11:23] <scipioartelius> Yeah I don't have a problem with making the cooldown longer. 30 seconds even is going to make it a much more critical decision and limit the ability to go sharpshooter -> propulsion -> defence in order to quickly lock the target, close on it and then tank the fight. The longer cooldown is going to make is harder to tank in the period before switching to defence mode, which may limit the ability to use that approach
[11:24] <ccp_fozzie> Hey folks, just want to let you all know that I'm going to be out of the office at a game design department offsite all day tomorrow so you can expect me to be silent until the weekend
[11:24] <scipioartelius> obviously 30s is just an arbitrary value. Not pushing for that.
[11:24] <syenna-celeste> Have fun.
[11:25] <syenna-celeste> Mmmyeah. I don't think it would need to be an earthshatteringly huge increase to the cooldown, even +3-5 seconds would be plenty.
[11:25] <selto_black> When will the first set of logs be released?
[11:25] <ccp_fozzie> I'll probably try and get them posted over the weekend
[11:25] <selto_black> Cool
[11:25] <ccp_fozzie> we're planning on setting up an automatic deployment to an ftp server but we haven't done all the setup there yet
[11:26] <ccp_fozzie> so the first few batches will be posted manually
[11:26] <ccp_fozzie> I'm running an IRC client connected to this team which is logging everything
[11:26] <fintarue> Looking forward to this. I'm terrified, and interested as to what the rest of peoples think about our discussion
[11:27] <ccp_fozzie> I have a feeling that 99% of the people who would bother reading through all this are already in the focus group:simple_smile:
[11:27] <scipioartelius> yes
[11:27] <ccp_fozzie> but we'll see
[11:27] <fintarue> lolol
[11:27] <ccp_fozzie> either way the transparency will have a lot of inherent value I think
[11:27] <forsot> http://puu.sh/kDpQH/54fa04d6fd.png(37KB) <- no damage mods just base application on an ab incursus
[11:27] <forsot> thats cn ammo
[11:28] <selto_black> im looking forward to all the cries of "omg that carebear doesn't belong in a pvp focus group"
[11:28] <fintarue> Carebears belong too, just shows how prevelant these things are
[11:28] <namamai> Yup, no objection to PvE players here
[11:29] <ccp_fozzie> I think the complaint du jour is that too many of you have interacted with the AT at some point
[11:29] <fintarue> Ah-ha! I missed that thing
[11:30] <syenna-celeste> Yeah, we'll go through a few weeks of this and it'll turn out we were all Kadesh Priestess all along.
[11:30] <selto_black> What about stripping all bonuses during the transition?
[11:30] <fintarue> I think one of the problems with people wanting pilots of bigger fleet sizes is that often in those sizes it doesn't matter what's being flown since they melt no matter what
[11:31] <selto_black> Instead of further increasing the timer you have to make the choice of whether the increased stats in 10 seconds is worth loosing the bonus you currently have.
[11:32] <syenna-celeste> I don't dislike the idea but it would hurt a Hecate?*a lot*?more than a Svipul for instance.
[11:32] <selto_black> How so?
[11:33] <syenna-celeste> Power of base hull vs power of bonuses. The svipul would be usable if you gave it sharpshooter mode and made those permanent stats. The Hecate.. No. Those are the most extreme examples but 10 seconds is a very long time to be left floating.
[11:33] <forsot> i can attest to that we used to skirmish with lazh in a WR granted we did 3x the damage but we also had twice the buffer but with 20ish dudes desis would be getting volleyed
[11:33] <forsot> and even then alot of ships wouldnt even be on mails
[11:34] <syenna-celeste> I didn't put that very well. My point is some of them rely on the mode bonuses (andr ightfully) a lot more than others.
[11:35] <fintarue> It's the same as the orthrus, often seen as broke or cancerous, but in extremely large fights it's bonuses are effectively a non factor since it can get volleyed so easily off the field. People would rather take the t2/t3 pointing variations for that ewar as it'll survive better. But in smaller engagements that's when the orthrus becomes insanity
[11:36] <syenna-celeste> My entire perception of the problem is based on the Confessor and Svipul particularly being good ships before the bonuses factor in, which stripping the bonuses during transition would only magnify.
[11:37] <scipioartelius> When the T3D were first proposed by CCP, there was talk of the modes providing utility but not being the strongest in any one thing. So they were going to be jack of all trades but master of none type ships that had stength in their flexibility. Seems that removing their bonuses in the transition just makes them weak more than versatile
[11:38] <ccp_fozzie> What we would definitely want to avoid (antigoal) would be having our changes discourage people from mode switching and creating more situations where you want to pick one mode and stick with it for a fight
[11:40] <selto_black> A situation probably more common in pvp than pve I'll admit.
[11:41] <syenna-celeste> @ccp_fozzie: Is it unreasonable of me to ask what you personally see as being the problem children of the T3D's? Are you especially (un)happy with any of them more than the others?
[11:42] <ccp_fozzie> as a whole class, the fact that they have reduced perceived choice in ship type is a problem (basically people feel that flying other small ships is a significantly less viable choice)
[11:43] <ccp_fozzie> as far as individual ships, the Svipul remains the outlier, both in feedback and in total usage
[11:43] <ccp_fozzie> I'll probably toss you guys some usage stats this afternoon so you can be looking at the same data I am
[11:44] <selto_black> Awesome. How hard would it be to pull pve data for:t3:destryoers?
[11:45] <selto_black> That's something I'd like to look at.
[11:45] <syenna-celeste> That would be an interesting read. Could you maybe include stats for T1 destroyers and assault frigates before/after T3D releases as well?(edited)
[11:57] <chessur> T3 destroyers are (for the most part) completely unkillable by anything destroyer and down
[11:58] <chessur> That is why they have pushed other ships out.
[11:58] <selto_black> Solo? Or microgang?
[11:59] <chessur> Throw in instawarp to protect you from gate camps, and the fact that they are so cheap
[11:59] <selto_black> If solo, isn't that the point of the ship?
[11:59] <chessur> And that their problem
[11:59] <chessur> Wait what?
[11:59] <chessur> No i dont think it is the poiny
[11:59] <chessur> Point *
[12:00] <scipioartelius> No, I don't think that's the point either
[12:00] <chessur> Destroyers, afs anf even dictors can be killed by frigates
[12:00] <chessur> Provided the frigate is flown well
[12:01] <forsot> Thats only half true, thats more an artifact of having high resists and most being active tanked i know a guy who has killed confessors with atrons because they were buffer tanked
[12:01] <scipioartelius> no solo ship is a pwn mobile on it's own. Every ship has strengths and weaknesses that mean in some solo situations it will be strong and in others it will be weak. With the T3D, especially the Svipul, it;s just strong by comparison to destroyers and frigates
[12:01] <chessur> Yes. Some ships are much stronger than average
[12:02] <chessur> T3ds and orthrus are some examples of ships that are flat out better than anything else in their class
[12:03] <ascentior> By no means do I think any T3Ds are impossible to beat. On the contrary, most can be pretty hardly countered. And at least in the case of FW, a fleet of T3Ds in a small is just an expensive loss mail when people rock up in cheap fit dessies.
[12:03] <forsot> are you trying to say my orthrus out running frigs isent balanced?
[12:03] <chessur> Arbitrary t3d killed by frig does little in the face of a mountain of t3d kills and usage stats(edited)
[12:03] <chessur> Indeed, i may be saying that
[12:04] <hoodie-mafia> inb4 Orthrus focus group
[12:04] <selto_black> Inb4 cruiser focus group.
[12:05] <selto_black> :t3:specifically
[12:05] <ascentior> But the versatility of them - particularly the speed and multiple engagement ranges - is what makes them brilliant
[12:05] <chessur> Heh, who knows
[12:08] <syenna-celeste> joined #tactical-destroyers
[12:09] <johndrees> Some ships should be better than others. It is just that in case of t3 destroyers it's not reflected in their price.
[12:09] <chessur> Price is a poor balance point imo
[12:10] <johndrees> That's probably because you have lots of money.
[12:10] <forsot> Ya they took the gank of a t1 desi gave it a bit more then gave it slots and fitting to fit more tank then a cruiser
[12:10] <chessur> And when you talk about ships better than others
[12:10] <forsot> while haveing mode switches that let you get the stats of an af on demand
[12:11] <chessur> T3ds are significantly better, than a huge majority of other small ships
[12:12] <chessur> I think that is a problem. Hence why we have this slack lol
[12:15] <selto_black> Sigh, minmatar finnaly get one worthwhile ship...
[12:15] <johndrees> Yes I'm aware of that. Specifically though look at the difference in price between the tech2 destroyers versus the cost of t3 destroyers when compared to the difference between t2 cruisers and t3 cruisers.
[12:16] <ascentior> oh, another important part of FW, if you are outside of 30km from the 'button' (capture point that is near the warp in beacon), and you can't kill me, I still win (capture the site). So controlling that 30km is the?_real_?aim of FW (although admittedly most people are there for kills)(edited)
[12:17] <selto_black> I'm trying to see the point you're trying to make, but then I remember how widespread:t3:cruiser usage is.
[12:18] <johndrees> So for example if a fully fit Legion cost the same price as a fully fit zealot I think we would see a drop off in the use of zealots.
[12:18] <selto_black> Maybe it's my bias of never having flown outside of communities with srp.
[12:20] <forsot> legions are used significantly more then zealots regardless of price
[12:21] <hoodie-mafia> I agree with Chessur that price is indeed a poor balancing point. We could just make them 150mil isk to build and call it quits but that would not change anything to the fact that they are in a way making other small ships (and assault ships in particular) obsolete
[12:21] <hoodie-mafia> It would bring down the overall usage as not everyone has the isk to fly 150million isk+ frigates, but for all the wrong reasons
[12:21] <selto_black> Balancing based on cost has never worked for ccp. Legions to zelots are one example, titans and supers are another.
[12:22] <chessur> I think constantly comparing t3d overlap with afs is dangerous
[12:22] <selto_black> The only hindrance making these ships more expensive would provide is to new players acquiring one.
[12:22] <chessur> Afs were always weaker ships, even before t3d
[12:23] <scipioartelius> I'm at work at the moment, so sort of lurking, but I like what Niden did with the speeds. Have started a Google Sheet that I'll share with everyone when I am home later that summarises a range of different data and extends the ships to include T1 and T2 Destroyers as well as Interceptors and Assault Frigates. Here is the base speed summary, but the sheet also includes sig radius and scan resolution and continue when I can throughout the day to put more attributes and bonused effects into it:http://puu.sh/kCj6Q/a71637b311.png(24KB)
[12:23] <selto_black> From what I've read, af were mainly used in small plexes.
[12:23] <chessur> The goal of this balance should not be to make afs viable, but t3d in line
[12:23] <johndrees> Kinda, they were good at anti-interceptor stuff.
[12:23] <hoodie-mafia> Well yea because everything around Assault Frigs has received buffs in the last years Chessur
[12:24] <chessur> How is an af anti interceptor
[12:24] <chessur> More than that hoodie
[12:25] <forsot> in my experience most afs are tied to brawling rolls outside of the cali ones which the t3 ds are not do to extremely loose fitting
[12:25] <chessur> Afs as a class will either be op to the extreme, or underwhelming. But let's not get off topic - this is T3d slack :)
[12:25] <johndrees> How is it not? Prior to the introduction of t3d it filled a role that was very similar to a destroyer but faster and with a smaller signature radius. Had you not flown an arty wolf at some point?
[12:26] <forsot> arty wolves have no tank
[12:26] <forsot> arty sviple does
[12:26] <chessur> Yes i have flown wolves, retribution, vengeance
[12:26] <hoodie-mafia> And just like all other small class ships. are tailored towards 1 thing
[12:26] <chessur> But again we should not talk afs
[12:28] <selto_black> So, how to build weaknesses into the svipuls and confessors modes.
[12:28] <hoodie-mafia> Well I don't think we can avoid talking about them as they are supressed by T3Ds which are the subject, but they are not alone and destroyers/faction frigates also suffer
[12:29] <chessur> I propose that new mode switch groups are discussed
[12:29] <johndrees> Well if we are to discuss balance it is only natural that we discuss the thing we intend to balance in relation to other things. It provides context. I agree we shouldn't stray on a tangent.
[12:29] <chessur> Andbi also propose that mode switch takes cap
[12:29] <selto_black> Why?
[12:29] <chessur> Because, currently it has no cost
[12:29] <chessur> You can do it for free
[12:30] <hoodie-mafia> It can cost you your ship:)
[12:30] <johndrees> This also provides further advantage to the svipul since it relies less on cap.
[12:30] <selto_black> You can switch subsystems for free too.
[12:30] <hoodie-mafia> thats not really the same thing Selto
[12:30] <selto_black> And fittings. (Devils advocate)
[12:30] <syenna-celeste> @johndrees: The Svipul is the only one of the four that doesn't fit a cap booster basically as standard. It might need to sacrifice a mid.(edited)
[12:31] <selto_black> So long as you have a Nestor/carrier/depot.
[12:31] <forsot> thats a good way to die
[12:31] <forsot> assuming mods dont activate properly.....
[12:32] <chessur> That is one of the advantages of minny ships
[12:32] <chessur> No cap guns, but weakest cap
[12:32] <chessur> Amarr has strongest cap in game
[12:33] <johndrees> Right, but in this case the clear outlier is the svipul so dreaming up ideas that provide further advantage to the ship are essentially the opposite of the goal.
[12:33] <syenna-celeste> It doesn't need to be a change in a vacuum.
[12:33] <chessur> It has weakest cap- ie. Few mode switch over a short period of time
[12:34] <selto_black> Is the 33% buff to base speed a broken mechanic? Imo it is. I'd much rather see all prop modes bonus a specific type of prop mod rather than base stats.
[12:34] <ascentior> Have I got my numbers wrong? Looks like some in that table include lvl 5 skills and some don't?
[12:34] <chessur> Speed, sharpshooter, defense modes
[12:34] <chessur> Should be looked at.
[12:35] <chessur> Can we come up with something betterfor mode switch?
[12:35] <chessur> Something else?
[12:35] <forsot> thats also relative when they have high base stats that already put them on par with smaller ships
[12:35] <johndrees> Well the speed mode being swapped to mwd across the board would solve the oversized prop mod problem once and for all. I think it's less interesting but it does resolve that particular point of issue.
[12:36] <forsot> that limits legitament 1mn fits tho
[12:36] <syenna-celeste> You could also solve that by fixing the PG cost of artillery.
[12:37] <selto_black> Making it an mwd bonus would kill wh pve john. I don't like that solution.
[12:37] <johndrees> The mode switch is unique, interesting, and creates additional strategy. It is inherently compelling game play. Introducing changes that discourage the use of that feature is a pretty clear negative in my opinion.
[12:37] <johndrees> @selto_blackI don't like that solution either, I was simply point it out.
[12:38] <selto_black> But syenna, that would mean that you could fit a reasonable tank on arty platforms...
[12:38] <hoodie-mafia> Maybe the strenghts of each mode could be slowly increased over time, so you swap to propulsion and it takes 20 seconds to get the full 66% speed buff
[12:39] <hoodie-mafia> But that gives another reason NOT to swap modes, which might be counter productive
[12:39] <johndrees> Interesting
[12:40] <syenna-celeste> We want more mode swapping. We also want t3ds not to step on the toes of T1, so weaker bonuses for a mode will need a stronger base hull to not ruin the ships. So stronger but more specific mode bonuses might be something to think about.
[12:40] <hoodie-mafia> It would atleast make them less powerful, but it does not fix the fact that the modes themselves are still superior to what you get on other frigates
[12:40] <syenna-celeste> Maybe more modes?
[12:40] <selto_black> No.
[12:41] <hoodie-mafia> Adding more modes without changing the current ones would just make them even stronger
[12:41] <selto_black> The only mode that I can see as being useful would be an ewar mode. That would just break all semblance of balance.
[12:41] <syenna-celeste> I didn't say anything about not changing current modes.
[12:42] <syenna-celeste> Reduce base cap recharge, give a capacitor recharge mode. Separate sharpshooter into range mode and tracking mode.
[12:42] <selto_black> That's clunky.
[12:42] <selto_black> Very arbitrary.
[12:42] <selto_black> Very mind warping to new players.
[12:43] <hoodie-mafia> Im curious, do you all think the Jackdaw is a balanced ship?
[12:43] <syenna-celeste> It's a 30 second suggestion. We want to encourage mode changes, which obviously isn't happening in its current state.
[12:43] <selto_black> I would be even more overwhelmed in pvp than I already am.
[12:44] <johndrees> I actually do think the jackdaw is pretty reasonable.
[12:44] <selto_black> The jackdaw is a staple Caldari ship.
[12:44] <syenna-celeste> Jackdaw is too strong in some areas, too weak in others. It scales exceptionally well when you throw money at it and tanks far harder than it should, but its damage output is in my mind far too low.
[12:44] <selto_black> It sits there, it tanks, and it hits you no matter what.
[12:45] <hoodie-mafia> How about mode switching boosts that are only temporary
[12:45] <johndrees> Depends on the situation. It's slower than the other t3d's. It does indeed tank hard but because it is easier for larger ships to catch it's not nearly as op as the svipul.
[12:46] <hoodie-mafia> As in, you swap to propulsion in the Svipul to get x seconds of 66% extra speed
[12:46] <selto_black> No.
[12:46] <selto_black> That kind of bonus would encourage mode switching yes, but only to abuse the extra stats.
[12:47] <selto_black> Thus making the ships have temporary god mode.
[12:47] <hoodie-mafia> what?
[12:47] <hoodie-mafia> No I mean making the current bonus you get only temporary
[12:47] <hoodie-mafia> instead of unlimited time, or until you change modes again
[12:48] <hoodie-mafia> NOT on top of the previous bonuses
[12:48] <syenna-celeste> You'd need to do a lot of playing with the base stats to get that into line but it's not a bad idea.
[12:48] <selto_black> That feels "gamey"
[12:48] <syenna-celeste> What if I?_want_?to stay in one mode though?
[12:48] <selto_black> ^
[12:48] <syenna-celeste> Maybe a weaker passive bonus with a temporary extra.
[12:49] <hoodie-mafia> Exactly
[12:49] <forsot> i feel like in with speed mode on ones with direct speed buff that would break the orbit mechanic
[12:49] <selto_black> Again people would abuse mode switches for the extra buffs.
[12:49] <hoodie-mafia> so lets say that you get 33% passive speed bonus ibn propulsion mode on the Svipul, but 66% for the first X seconds after you swap
[12:50] <syenna-celeste> No they wouldn't because you're losing the stats from the other mode when you switch.
[12:50] <hoodie-mafia> they are not extra buffs Selto
[12:50] <syenna-celeste> It's a full shift and it still has a cooldown. It makes sitting in one mode weaker and rewards well used switches.
[12:51] <selto_black> They are when compared to the new long term buffs form your proposal.
[12:51] <syenna-celeste> What long term buffs? Are we reading the same chat?
[12:51] <forsot> having multiple changes to the ships velocity will make manual piloting them extremely key otherwise you are likely to die to larger ships vary quickly
[12:52] <syenna-celeste> Is that not a good thing?
[12:52] <hoodie-mafia> Thats a good thing!
[12:52] <forsot> it makes use of orbit mechanic not a good option
[12:52] <forsot> it makes it a bad one actually
[12:53] <hoodie-mafia> In fact having 50% of the applied bonus from a mode be only temporary might work both to increase manual piloting, adds an incentive to swap modes more often and will slightly nerf them overall
[12:53] <forsot> as when your speed changes your ship will decelerate and change direction
[12:53] <syenna-celeste> the orbit mechanic is a bad option 80% of the time as it is
[12:54] <syenna-celeste> there's no reason to eliminate what sounds like a fun and what might be a very neat solution just because one archaic mechanic that's already pretty much useless wouldn't play nicely with it
[12:55] <forsot> it seems more like something to be gamed on players who dont understand mechanics is all
[12:56] <scipioartelius> It's base attributes for each ship. The skills are for the T3D, but not the others. I didn't double check Niden's values to be certain, but will do so
[12:56] <hoodie-mafia> but thats not something limited to tactical destroyers
[12:56] <selto_black> From the pve side of things, that arbitrary decrease in stats will lead to a massive inconsistency in how damage gets mitigated and applied.
[12:56] <hoodie-mafia> Well it would make you want to switch modes more often
[12:57] <hoodie-mafia> You would have to watch your buff timer and make sure you are not under that much pressure when your mode buff expires and is halved
[12:57] <hoodie-mafia> whats so bad about that?
[12:57] <selto_black> Which would be highly frustrating if I have to do it any more than I do now.
[12:58] <selto_black> As it stands I'm switching modes every 45 sec to 1.5 min.
[12:58] <syenna-celeste> What prompts you to switch modes?
[12:58] <selto_black> Range dictation and neuts.
[12:59] <selto_black> Well ewar.
[12:59] <scipioartelius> actually, I'll go double check them all using PyFA. You're right
[12:59] <scipioartelius> I was looking in game rather than out of game. So will update all appropriately
[12:59] <johndrees> Over what duration would you suggest the bonuses be reapplied/deminished?