These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Ship balancing winter update

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
m3talc0re X
The Motley Crew of Disorder
The Gorram Shiney Alliance
#141 - 2012-09-11 20:28:08 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Is there any plan to actually address drones and their issues?

You CCP folks appear to be forgetting that drone DPS currently can only really best be used as a supplemental bit of DPS or Ewar because:

1. They normally take an ages to actually catch up to a target to actually apply their dps
2. They are the only weapon system that gets destroyed / left behind regularly on the battlefield
3. Sentry guns dont like drones making use of them in lowsec as a pirate pretty much a no-no
4. The E-war stacking penalties are horrible to all drones except ECM drones

If your balancing plan consists of making more out and out drone ships, especially smaller hulls - then please consider giving us smaller sentry drones at least for the frigates/destroyers along with some buffs or perhaps new modules (taking up turret hardpoints) to enable us to launch more than the 5 again to the old maximum of 10, so the enemy can suffer the brutality of a proper drone swarm once more...

On the whole though, balancing going well so far - but do please speed up or at this rate I'll be an O.A.P by the time you get round to fixing the Black Ops.

Cheers.



I kinda agree with Vyktor here, as I pointed out in an old thread for drones. Not only are these things true, but Amarr/Minmatar drones are seriously nerfed compared to Caldari/Gallente drones. And sentries should have limited propulsion.. See thread.

And on this note, with all this ship balancing and bs, what about missiles? When are you going to actually finish working on them? Torps are lols, for example...
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#142 - 2012-09-11 20:29:08 UTC
Just don't let the arbitrator become sad, it should always be happy.
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#143 - 2012-09-11 20:34:00 UTC
you should really finish intro ducing those anti blobing mecanchics.....

For instance reps doing less as they stack on a target. throw more than 9 reps on someone and you might as well not throw anymore on.

Also on the attack. There needs to be a reason to not all fire at the same target. If you don't fix this long standing 9 year old issue these changes are going to lead to some unexpected side effects.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg
Shoo Ting
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2012-09-11 20:46:00 UTC
What's a Scythe? I never heard of such a ship.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#145 - 2012-09-11 21:03:37 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
Just don't let the arbitrator become sad, it should always be happy.


The Arbitrator is going to have friends that it can play with! Nothing could make it happier.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#146 - 2012-09-11 21:08:19 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Herping yourDerp wrote:
Just don't let the arbitrator become sad, it should always be happy.


The Arbitrator is going to have friends that it can play with! Nothing could make it happier.


how many slots will it have and how come you're dropping from 15 slots to 14?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Kingston Black
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2012-09-11 21:35:36 UTC
bunny ears!!!!

THANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOU

/emote goes to buy another vagabond
Jace Errata
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#148 - 2012-09-11 21:38:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jace Errata
Holy fucknuts on a stick, Batman.

Are all the Minmatar ships gonna get shiny new hulls to match the Stabber? Because I think they should.

Edit: for the record, I did not censor fiddle that. It's just not censored for some reason.

tweeten

One day they woke me up so I could live forever

It's such a shame the same will never happen to you
Angmar Udate
#149 - 2012-09-11 21:56:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Angmar Udate
/me thinks the new minni ships are too shinny and should be more rusty. I am slightly concerned I may need sunglasses wheb flying these things. I do like the new model, but I also like the current models an d think there other ships that are in more desperate need of a new model. Looking at you Typhoon.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#150 - 2012-09-11 22:01:17 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
So any plans to make amarr laser ships about something other than scorch ammo? How about some beam lasers.

Having to rep in station and buy more cap boosters after every fight is bad for solo. Hopefully it won't have to be fitted like that. I wanted to see mini apocs and geddons, not geddons and abaddons.



This, very much this.. Although i don't hate the baddon? :P

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Sephanor
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#151 - 2012-09-11 22:13:00 UTC
Holy crap, the ship balancing team have gone into super saiyan mode on us, all those ships, I cant wait!
Crevo Helion
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#152 - 2012-09-11 22:16:25 UTC
As if I didn't fly the vaga enough, now I'll never leave it! Big smile

You guys in the art dept have outdone yourselves. Not only did you hear our cries, but you took that as a challenge and made the new stabber/vaga hull once again look as mean as it should be.
Oxandrolone
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2012-09-11 22:18:12 UTC
people moaning about them only helping new players out with ships your looking at this wrong!

there tryng to make T1 ships more viable so they have a role even for experienced players and bittervets
Annoitte
Rogue Businessmen
#154 - 2012-09-11 22:24:30 UTC
Looking at the new (and damn fine looking, as in, "Hey, baby, how you doin'?") Stabber skin, I can only wonder, is there going to be a new skin for the Tempest? Ever?

If the answer is "yes", you need to rethink your position. The wingy bits need to stay!!
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#155 - 2012-09-11 22:33:46 UTC
Well if nothing else the new Stabber/Vaga looks very nice.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#156 - 2012-09-11 23:31:23 UTC
"Dev Blog" wrote:
The Vexor is a good ship, and will receive some resilience boosts to fit into the new combat role.
More resilience? Holy christ. Like it wasn't a tough enough brick as it was. Lonetrek shall weep beneath the boot of the new Vexor (and possibly the Moa depending on what you do to it).
MintyRoadkill
Vulture Enterprises
Brotherhood of Spacers
#157 - 2012-09-11 23:38:46 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Moa needs cap and fitting, not blasters.


Blasters will help, though.

The Caracal will be the Caldari Long-Range Cruiser.



And while we're at it, FIX THE EAGLE. (Also the Cerberus, but mostly the Eagle)
MintyRoadkill
Vulture Enterprises
Brotherhood of Spacers
#158 - 2012-09-11 23:39:48 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
bassie12bf1 wrote:
So, what about the scythe fleet issue, osprey navy issue, exequror navy issue, augoror navy issue?


The faction ships are all being looked at in due course, however we're planning to get the basic T1 versions done first.


Why not get rid of those hulls and add faction versions of the old tier 3 cruisers? Those would be genuinely nice.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#159 - 2012-09-12 00:31:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
My friends have voiced some concern about the direction the balance of the game is taking with the upcoming changes to ship hulls. Increasingly, it's looking as though the balancing game is being played with particular load-outs for ships in mind, turning the Rock-Paper-Scissors game into one based around your choice of ship, without leaving opportunities to innovate in a ship's load-outs.

To a certain extent, I agree.

Part of the old design schema of Eve Online was that every tech 1 ship received minor bonuses towards particular rolls, and it was up to the myriad equipment/modules/skills available to the player to get something good out of the hull, rather than a predetermined optimum serving as the balancing benchmark. It's not an easy approach, by any stretch, but it did keep things interesting. By placing each ship into a designated roll, with designated fits and designed goals in mind when creating them, the risk is run that people won't have a chance to figure out any clever ways to use a hull outside of the vision chosen by the game designers.

Will there be steps taken in the allocation of slots, grid, CPU, and other attributes to force players to make compromises in the loadout and capabilities of their hulls, such as limiting the amount of CPU or Grid that they have so that players will find themselves asking "if only I could fit a 1600mm plate instead of an 800 while keeping these large guns..." and other such questions?
Kagumichan
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#160 - 2012-09-12 00:48:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagumichan
The moment you said, "turning Omen into mini-Armageddon and turning Maller into mini-Abaddon", I knew that this winter is going to be awesome Cool

For the next ship design update though might I suggest overhauling the Caldari cruiser's appearances, 'cos at the moment they all look like strange assortments of lego bricks :P