Thats a cool story. But I have another one.

A 6-tuning Joe took a vaga friend with double RSA and rolled over everyone else.

The End.

[EDIT to the post above] If 2xSA makes You vulnerable to ECM then we are done talking.

I am not going to wait few days as I promissed - sorry! Fun facts:

1.
Kain 4 firearms tunings + 4 autocannons = 4 x 1623.08% = 6492.32%
Vagabond 6 firearms tunings + 3 autocannons = 3 x 2691.81% = 8075.43%

Next time you see them Ewar mechs go solo - BEWARE!
Similar thing happens with cameleon vs yagel. Its even comparable to arbalest for crying out loud.

2.
Mesmer MK2 5 magno tunings + 6 gauss guns = 6 x 3162.41% = 18974.46%
Seth MK2 6 magno tunings + 6 gauss guns = 6 x 4111.13% = 24666.78%

So who screamed the loudest that Mesmers are OP?

Do you want to know how much more dps were mesmers doing over seths with gauss before both tuning patches? 5.13%
How much more DPS were Seths doing with lasers over mesmers? 42.42%

Conclusions:
1. Tunings cant be more than racial bonus (unless point 2 and 3). (+10% damage and -10% cycle time = 22.22% dps increase)
2. Blue combats need -1 leg and +1 head slot. And this is not a very recent issue.
3. With lowest head slot count syndicate combats are bad, really bad. (they were ok when tunings were utterly useless just before this patch). I would go with more headslots on par with others and lower leg slots to make them more squishy becouse its not MK2.
4. Active repping fits are unviable again.
5. PvE is really fun now so I wouldn't go down on DPS all that much.
6. Please stop going from one extreme to another.

Considering recent PvE experience and points above (head slots equality! work places for nuimqol!):
(Power of module% / accumulator usage%)

Enwar tunings:
T0 = 10/15
T1/T2 = 15/15
T3 = 15/10
T4 = 25/25

Industrial tunings:
T0 = 10/20
T1/T2 = 20/20
T3 = 20/10
T4 = 30/30

Repair tunings:
T0 = 10/20
T1/T2 = 20/10
T3 = 20/0
T4 = 40/20

Weapon tunings:
T0 = 10/20
T1/T2 = 20/20
T3 = 20/10
T4 = 30/30

WEAPONS

Current damage per accumulator of T4 weapons:
Light missiles: 40
Light laser: 5
Light EM: 4.8
Light AC: 18

Medium compact: 60
MEdium ballistic: 40
LCL: 2.5
HCL: 2
Gauss: 2.4
Medium EM: 1.33
Medium AC and MG used to be both 18 can't bother to calc how it is now as most posters here don't bother comprehending anyway and it seems balanced toward each other now.

Should be (acc use per shot this time to make things harder for some):
Light missiles: 4
Light lasers: 4
Light EM: 4
Light AC: 2

Medium launcher: 10
HCL: 12
LCL: 10
Gauss: 10
Medium EM: 12 (becouse before was WTF!)
Medium AC and MG: x2 of current

I will also post a difference between 40% and 30% bonus with 6 tuners equipped:
753% vs 482% (2 shots to kill unplated heavies and mechs then).

On an end note:
If one does not comprehend mathematics one should not post in topics involving numbers.

With 15m dispersion and 3m surface on assault I got 20% chance to hit. Unless plated (and therefore easier to hit) that 1 gun hit will kill it. With 6 guns (each having 20% chance to hit) I have 73.79% chance for a single gun to connect.

[EDIT] Or you know what.. I am not going to compare and calculate. Well too tired/sleepy for that. Going to come back after a few days of this mayhem and see if you figured out some really OP possibilities by then.

  It would matter for every fight that lasts more than few seconds. Remember that efficiency ratios scale exponentially.

  With 50% dmg increase 6 tunings would increase DMG to 1139% how many robots can survive a volley like that from heavy mech? Accumulator consumption 170%^6 would be 2413% so it would probably be a "one shot wonder" build.

  Now dont get me wrong. I'm all up for having a "killall" robot 1 shooting stuff and running to a group of energy transfer "buddies" for refill. Group of shooters taking out first few targets before the battle even begins. I'd love to have a bunch of heavies on teleports sweeping anyone who decides to have a peak. But will it help the balance?

  PvE now is kind of weird. You let them high end npc shoot a few times and then they just sit there shooting a single gun every now and then.

  I also have to say that i like how current situation encouraged active tanking builds and variety of head slots. Weapon tunings needed rebalance not removal tho.

  Another thing that I would like to point out (that became prominent with recent changes) is the difference in efficiency between small and medium modules. With such drastic tuning changes we might begin to see heavies with light weapons (we already use small miners, harvesters and repairers).

Point taken. Would increase 18%/15% to 18%/18% (or maybe even 20%/20%?) on T4 becouse of it. No efficiency change (and no penalty).

T3 with 12%/5% are very similar in acc efficiency as tunings before the changes. Old T4 were 19.2%/7.5% (*).
2.4:1 on proposed T3 vs 2.56:1 on old T4. A ratio of 12%/4% on T3 would make it 3:1 = much more efficient than old tunings.

To have diminishing returns similar pattern to that of resistances would have to be used, thats alot more computation every time one shoots and would lag the game. Alot less variables (1 variable just to name it) involved in calculating resistance - before it is asked.

Limitations on number of modules would limit the number of different fits and scratch the whole idea WHY it is being made = to make other than 5-6 weapon tuning heavy mechs an option.

(*EDIT*) = that includes 3% critical hit (and calculates DPS/Acc not dmg/acc), should that be left on new tunings proposed T3 would be more efficient than old T4 as it is (12/5 would be 15/5 in that case).

More like depending if solo or with logi. Sniping or tanking. Full attention or semi afk. Various situations call for verious fits.
  Looks good on paper is what one can only hope for when theory crafting. Actual outcome cannot be predicted, and will never be able to calculate. Balanced numbers and percentages is what we can aim for at this stage. Testing in confined environment will not produce results either.
  Concerns can be raised at this stage. My concern is eliminating any advantage of higher tier of modules. Efficiency loss at higher tiers. Insta killing builds (700%+ dmg increase) and firearms and missile bias.
  If costs are not a factor for PvP then why don't we see only black heavy mechs fitted with all T4+ ?

I would agree if every next tuning fitted had diminishing returns. So far (before patch) every next one gave proportionally more benefits than previous one. Therefore the more tunings you have already the less beneficial it is to fit anything else than yet another one. Old six T4 tuners tripled dps output. All that at no penalty and even tho acc stability took a hit with shorter cycles efficiency was actually rising.
   Every heavy used to stack tunings. No diversity.

I think diversyfiing between t1-t4 is a great idea! It made me scratch my work that I had ready to post prior to reading it and redo it but I think it was worth it.

First lets get some facts out of the way.
1. 20% increase to the power of 6 (6 modules equipped) is 2.985 or basically almost ideally 3 times increase.
2. T4 is harder to make than T3. T3 is harder to make than T2.

Now for my proposition:
T0 = terrible tunings, might be considered better than nothing but thats about it
T1 = Increase in effectiveness but not efficiency
T2 = Identical to T1 but with lower fitting requirements. (basically as they are now - lets not mess up fits we all love to use shall we?)
T3 = Same increase in effectiveness as t1/t2 but better efficiency.
T2+ = Stats of T3 with fitting requirements of T2 (easiest solutions = best solutions)
T3- = Stats of T3 but higher fitting requirements
T4 = Best increase in effectiveness, slight increase in efficiency (but not as high as T3)
T4+ = Better increase in effectiveness and almost as good in efficiency as T3.

Basically if lacking TF and PG = fit T2 , accumulator = T3, power = T4

T4 is still best if you can afford both fitting and accumulator requirements (it is most expensive and difficult to build right?)
T3 will help you stable accumulator greatly.
T2 when you are missing TF or PG or need mre velocity.
T1 is not as good - but hey its cheap and infinite.

Now for numbers:
-It doesnt take rate of fire into factor - I absolutely agree on eliminating too many variables.
-Im going to call repaired/gathered/drained ammount and damage as power.
-Repair, Industrial, Enwar and Weapon tunings have identical increase in power and accumulator becouse above.

Tier 0
Power = 6% increase
Accumulator = 12% increase

Tier 1 and Tier 2
Power = 12% increase
Accumulator = 12% increase

Tier 2+, Tier 3, Tier 3-
Power = 12% increase
Accumulator = 5% increase

Tier 4
Power = 18% increase
Accumulator = 15% increase

Tier 4+
Power = 20% increase
Accumulator = 14% increase

Now to make other propositions easier for anyone not willing to do the mathematics here is a link to those values calculated into number of modules and accumulator efficiency associated with it. Copy it , change only values with yellow background, observe how values change and post your counter propositions if You have them.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ … sp=sharing

(EDIT: its T3- not T3+)

Lets focus on one of them:

10p = 9.09%
45p = 28.57%  (+19.48) = 1 universal hardener
80p = 50%       (+21.43) = 2 hardeners

The % is increasing rather than decreasing - idk if theres any pattern to that increase but lets take best case scenario that % stop increasing:

3 hardeners = 71.43%
4 hardeners = 92.86%
5 hardeners = 114.29%

Are you supposed to be healed by damage in the resistance hole after equipping 5 universal hardeners?

I'm gonna put some numbers that are in the game atm for comparison:

10 points = 9.09%
45 points = 31.03% (+21.94)       
80 points = 44.44% (+13.41)
115 points= 53.49% (+9.05)

Notice the diminishing returns on % of resistance here.

Lets get some facts out of the way for anyone who doesn't know:
0 to 20% increase is proportionally same as 50 to 60% increase despite it being half of the raw % difference. 20% is one fifth of full 100% damage and 10% is also one fifth of the remaining 50% damage.

And now for the extreme!
Seth mk2, lvl10 skills, 5 kinetic activated hardeners =  920 points = 90.2% resistance
Seth mk2, lvl10 skills, 6 kinetic activated hardeners = 1070points = 91.45% resistance

Remaining 9.8% is reduced to 8.55% (thats 14.62% increase of remaining resistance pattern)
6800 armor becomes 79532 effective hit points in that resistance!

Resistances are very well balanced. No point changing that.

Hermes is far from worthless - ability to see all 10 artifacts from middle of island makes it a primary artificing bot for me, especially with artifact resets it gives some nice "cherry picking" options.

EDIT:
30% increase in radius is equal to 69% increase in area of a circle.

EDIT2:
Have anyone actually tested Locust? After tuning changes?
Ikarus is good for what it is, and definitely for the price.
Echelon is not that bad, its better than any mk1 mechs thats for sure.
Daidalos boasts very good speed/tank/cargo/price. I use it alot.
Hermes is awesome.
Cronus is downright terrible It needs +1 head slot, even for the cost of leg. If it gets +1 head slot it would still be only slightly better than argano/laird mk2.