Fixing Rigs?

Vortex has a post on the eve-o forums (in response to CCP Ytterbium floating the idea of a rig change) that I think is especially interesting:

[…] In all of these situations, rig penalties don’t provide any compelling gameplay choices. There is no way armor-nano can ever be a thing with penalties (as just one of many examples), as all the relevant rigs are at cross odds. No enterprising player can make an unorthodox fit that actually works, because the game just says “nope!”. So you fit the obvious rig with the meaningless penalty, and that’s all that anyone can or will do.


1)Remove rig penalties. They have completely failed at their purpose (providing tangible tradeoffs in ship performance), and are nothing more than meaningless legacy game-design impacting today’s EVE.

2) Change rig skills to behave like Spaceship Command Skills. In other words, you can have “Armor rigging 4”, but what armor rigging 4 gives you depends on the rig itself.

2.A) Change rigs to scale off their related rigging skill. Trimarks, instead of a flat +15% armor bonus, would become “+3% armor HP per level of Armor Rigging”.


I think the idea has merit.

It has been a long time since rigging a ship was anything but mandatory on a combat ship. They’re cheap enough that the choice is no longer “do I rig this ship and live with the penalties, or leave it stock?” but “Do I use rig A and live with the penalties, or just use rig B that has no penalty?”

The opportunity cost of all rigs is not the cost or the penalty, but “is this better than just slapping on a trimark or CDFE?” and that doesn’t leave a lot of room for nuance.

IMO, playing with the strengths of each rig and the calibration they use is a better balancing tool than messing with penalties that are easily mitigated.


3 Responses to “Fixing Rigs?”

  1. April 27, 2012 at 11:58 am

    What makes me cautious about this idea is that it’s another minmax element that would favour veterans. The current system puts every player more or less the same footing (eg every player using Trimarks gets 15% armour, even if some will slow their ships more than others). The proposed system would give veterans 15% armour but newbies only 3%. When you add this to all the other little buffs and stats it extends a gap that’s already too wide.

    • 2 Serpentine Logic
      April 27, 2012 at 1:53 pm

      It’s only a 2-day train to get to level IV, and thus 12% armor. This is really a non-issue.

    • 3 Searsy
      April 28, 2012 at 4:35 pm

      What is wrong with rewarding a loyal player base? Vets get better rewards cos they have played the game longer and there for have better skills, how with the current skill training method could it be any diff?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: