These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Back to the balancing future!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#201 - 2012-11-06 18:07:08 UTC
Dracko Malus wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:
There is a lot of talk about boosting from behind a POS shield. I actually think this is fine (and should be possible) IF boosting is changed to ongrid boosting. So if you defend a POS, you can have the booster inside the shield, makes perfect sense.
Obviously it is broken at the moment with Offgrid boosting, so a temporary fix might be in order that at least removes this ability for now, in other words: put it back once boosting is changed to be ongrid only!

To me it would be very sad if even people defending a pos couldn't boost from inside.


I might be thinking too simple but can't you just set the boost range to the mining links to systemwide and the others to "on-grid"? Or are people going to complain that people mining should have a booster in their belt because boosting mining from a POS also gives the miners an unfair advantage? This eliminates the discussion rolling back to mining where I think it has no relation.


significant boost should have significant risk... its how to balance things

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
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#202 - 2012-11-06 18:08:01 UTC
Havegun Willtravel wrote:
The genuine issue here has nothing to do at all with the hulls. It's AC's. Fall off makes no sense in any logical analysis. Combined with dial in damage selection, no cap use, and to a lesser degree tracking enhancers, there is little incentive to fly any other race of gunship. This is the root cause that you need to be addresing, not hull changes.

Scorch says 'hi!'

I don't know what you mean about falloff making no sense but falloff-bonus Barrage is explo/kin only and the dial in damage selection takes you ten seconds to switch in space. Projectile bonus ships have less capacitor to begin with, compared to laser and hybrid ships, and drones and missiles are also neut neutral (heh!) damage projection.

TE and TC got buffed and it was a good change. We can argue about percentages, but having a reason to think about something else except "how many damagemods can I get on there" makes the fitting game more interesting.
Darnok Iksnibiks
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#203 - 2012-11-06 18:09:59 UTC
Quote:
We want to explore options on how to turn the Brutix into a more reliable close-range brawler, while the Talos keeps a kiting advantage.


This sentence have build in flaw. Talos with large guns have both kite and range (minimal but still) advantage over Brutix. Former T1 BC, as being more durable, but slower will not be able to catch or use tracking advantage over Talos. Moreover, by any meant it wont be able to tank full rack of neutrons... Personalty I think it will end in old drake shoes... ship that dies slowly...

Same story with Minmatar ships and to some extent on Caldari and Amarr. I don't see any edge on Brutix at planned specification.

Regarding Command ships. Amarr and Minmatar will dominate on that field it possibility to fit most usable links. Information warfare have extremely limited use to say it mildly... Gallente racial link is overhauled i hardly see Caldari or Gallente CS on field.

With regards
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#204 - 2012-11-06 18:10:22 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Lors Dornick wrote:
Jennifer A wrote:
Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats.

You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue?

There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it.

Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;)


designer minions lol


Technically they're my minions Cool


Danish Imperialist!!

Using innocent icelanders for your gain, the danish never change...... <.<

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Dracko Malus
Messerschmitt Vertrieb und Logistik
#205 - 2012-11-06 18:11:09 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Dracko Malus wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:
There is a lot of talk about boosting from behind a POS shield. I actually think this is fine (and should be possible) IF boosting is changed to ongrid boosting. So if you defend a POS, you can have the booster inside the shield, makes perfect sense.
Obviously it is broken at the moment with Offgrid boosting, so a temporary fix might be in order that at least removes this ability for now, in other words: put it back once boosting is changed to be ongrid only!

To me it would be very sad if even people defending a pos couldn't boost from inside.


I might be thinking too simple but can't you just set the boost range to the mining links to systemwide and the others to "on-grid"? Or are people going to complain that people mining should have a booster in their belt because boosting mining from a POS also gives the miners an unfair advantage? This eliminates the discussion rolling back to mining where I think it has no relation.


significant boost should have significant risk... its how to balance things


Agreed, but mining boosts.. really? To be honest the mining gangs I know already have 2 Rorq's in the belt* and 1 at a POS so I guess its not really a problem. It'd just be a "nerf" to highsec miners wih gankable Orca's.

*scanned sites, not actual Belts of course.

Tess La'Coil's loveslave.
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#206 - 2012-11-06 18:12:32 UTC
Ong wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:
There is a lot of talk about boosting from behind a POS shield. I actually think this is fine (and should be possible) IF boosting is changed to ongrid boosting. So if you defend a POS, you can have the booster inside the shield, makes perfect sense.
Obviously it is broken at the moment with Offgrid boosting, so a temporary fix might be in order that at least removes this ability for now, in other words: put it back once boosting is changed to be ongrid only!

To me it would be very sad if even people defending a pos couldn't boost from inside.


You cant do a single thing inside a pos, cant lock let alone shoot/point even agro with smart bombs. Giving bonus from inside a pos is a broken mechanic, and leads to zero risk for the ship itself. T3 links can be scaned, commands on field can be killed, everything in this game should have risk.


Well there is still a risk, but only if you defend the POS when coming out of reinforced (grated, the risk only comes into play once you fail to actually defend it). I kinda glanced over when the POS is being put into reinforced, but how often is it actually defended in that case? (Yes, I'm really asking, how many % of attacks to reinforce a POS actually encouter direct resistance?)
James Arget
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#207 - 2012-11-06 18:13:35 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
James Arget wrote:
If you're looking to make info links more useful, give us some neut/capacitor bonuses with them.


not sure what you mean by neut bonus to a link but certainly cap and fittings need to be looked at.

An Info link that will reduce the duration/decrease cost/increase xfer amount for capacitor neuts and nosses.

CSM 8 Representative

http://csm8.org
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
#208 - 2012-11-06 18:14:27 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Lors Dornick wrote:
Jennifer A wrote:
Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats.

You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue?

There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it.

Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;)


designer minions lol


Technically they're my minions Cool


Danish Imperialist!!

Using innocent icelanders for your gain, the danish never change...... <.<

The Raivi is icelandic? That accent could have fooled anyone. Who would have known ...

CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#209 - 2012-11-06 18:16:06 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Harvey James wrote:

An AOE range would be the way too go and make all CS brawlers


However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres? Smile


I can dig this, make it so. Now chop chopCool
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#210 - 2012-11-06 18:19:41 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
Regarding the Ferox, if we're trying to keep it advantaged as a sniper, I feel like there's really only one way to think about it. It's not a large Moa, it's a smaller, faster Rokh. The tank bonus is needed for durability, I'd expect, and giving it range/damage will make it just a smaller-gunned version of the Naga, whose problems other people have covered here. (I agree with the people saying that "Large Moa" will make one or the other insufficiently good. The same goes for the Naga comparison.)

I'd really like to see a properly snipey Ferox, now that I might actually have T2 medium rails soon, but it needs to be able to hold up under fire to compete with things like the Drake, even if that's an extreme example which may be getting a tanking nerf to go with its damage nerf.


The problem with this is that the rokh isn't all that great with rails either. Ferox with medium rails and an optimal bonus has horrid dps, that's why no one uses it.

That's why I am saying give it a bonus to overheating, so it can hold higher tank and higher DPS for a long period, which only uses one out of 2 of the boat's bonuses. Then give it either a damage or a range bonus as well, whatever seems more useful.

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#211 - 2012-11-06 18:19:53 UTC
I like all the proposed changes except the Hurricane.

The ship is full of awesomeness even if it's not a "monster" like a Drake.

It's awesomeness comes exactly from its versatility (not for inner super-powers) and seeing it taken away really makes me sad.
I literally have fun at experimenting zillions and zillions of new setups with it, it's really that great.
What good is going to do, to make it less great? If it got overpowered stats then nerf those, not the ship fun.

The Typhoon imo should not become a full missile boat.
It's sig radius and speed would not really be valuable as they are now. Imo it should become a big Hurricane brother, that is versatile and in the middle between Mael and Tempest.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Ong
Lumberjack Commandos
#212 - 2012-11-06 18:21:47 UTC
Creat Posudol wrote:
Ong wrote:
Creat Posudol wrote:
There is a lot of talk about boosting from behind a POS shield. I actually think this is fine (and should be possible) IF boosting is changed to ongrid boosting. So if you defend a POS, you can have the booster inside the shield, makes perfect sense.
Obviously it is broken at the moment with Offgrid boosting, so a temporary fix might be in order that at least removes this ability for now, in other words: put it back once boosting is changed to be ongrid only!

To me it would be very sad if even people defending a pos couldn't boost from inside.


You cant do a single thing inside a pos, cant lock let alone shoot/point even agro with smart bombs. Giving bonus from inside a pos is a broken mechanic, and leads to zero risk for the ship itself. T3 links can be scaned, commands on field can be killed, everything in this game should have risk.


Well there is still a risk, but only if you defend the POS when coming out of reinforced (grated, the risk only comes into play once you fail to actually defend it). I kinda glanced over when the POS is being put into reinforced, but how often is it actually defended in that case? (Yes, I'm really asking, how many % of attacks to reinforce a POS actually encouter direct resistance?)



Im going to say hardly ever, to form a gang usually large enough to defend again a gang that's large enough to attack a pos takes times to form.

The mechanic however leads to people fighting else ware in system with links in a pos, this is the broken part that needs to be stopped not pos defences that will usually come with logy and be able to keep a command ship alive.
Lynx Sawpaw
Hole Divers
Wardec Mechanics
#213 - 2012-11-06 18:22:05 UTC
@ CCP

Please don't forget how weak information warfare gang link bonuses are. Perhaps make them boost more than just ECM, increasing the effectiveness of target painting, sensor damps, neuts, and tracking disruptors.

I love skirmish warfare on Amarr because I love Amarr, but I think it makes more sense on the Gallente hulls for what the races represent. Amarr is the slow variation on armor tanking, much like Caldari is the slow version of shield tanking, and Gallente is the fast version of armor tanking, similar to Minmatar for shields. Gallente ships are the ones with the bonus to long range warp disruption for armor as well, much like Minmatar has a bonus to long range webbing.

Right now looking at the planned bonuses, Minmatar and Caldari are the only command ships who's bonuses actually match the race's purposes in a fleet.
Johan March
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#214 - 2012-11-06 18:24:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Johan March
In general, I really like tiericide and rebalancing.

But CCP's idea about making cross-training harder and T2 ship specialization has a big flaw: the cost of T2 ships. Outside of interceptors, covops, and assault frigs, T2 ships are stupid expensive. With T2 ships usually being about 20-30 times the cost of their t1 variant, PVP in these ships really isn't in the cards for your average new-ish player. How many six to nine month old players are going to be able to afford to PVP in Claymores? But I'm sure lots of players, myself included, used the way destroyers and BC's are done to fly different ships as the need arose.

Gallente MWD / cap / active tank / broken drone issues will keep Gallente usefulness down for a while. Perhaps giving Gallente ships and Armor HP bonus as opposed to the semi-useless rep bonus would be better.

Brutix and Ferox will continue to be outshined by the Talos and Naga.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#215 - 2012-11-06 18:25:19 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
CCP Fozzie,

Is there any plans to completely change information links to something more useful? Currently shield, armor and speed links help every ship. 99% of the time players will choose one of those three over information bonuses every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The current fleet hierarchy only sees real use of bonuses in the fleet and wing command spots. Which is tank and skirmish. Would changing the info bonuses to be bonuses to drones, which 90% of all ships in the game have, be an option?

Also I am one of the 7 with max information bonuses on T3 and command ships. Blink


I trained max information warfare skills specifically for one Info Claymore fit for the AT. And then joined CCP before ever actually flying that ship on TQ.

Oops

don't feel bad i trained information warfare all the way up to the mindlink before realizing i misread and it was the skirmish bonuses that affected warp disruptors

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#216 - 2012-11-06 18:26:04 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Lors Dornick wrote:
Jennifer A wrote:
Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats.

You're sure that you want the game designers monitoring this thread getting involved in a long outstanding UI issue?

There are better targets for that (5 y celebrating Karkur, Puncturis and "don't touch that button" Tuxford seems likely) and they appear to be well aware of it.

Let's focus our balancing wrath on Ytterbium and his game designer minions ;)


designer minions lol


Technically they're my minions Cool



yeah so what are your ideas for fixing active armour tanking?

any idea when we can get a blog about that becuase it seems to be a rather important topic due to the whole rebalancing thing...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Denegrah Togasa
Perkone
Caldari State
#217 - 2012-11-06 18:26:09 UTC
I understand the policy is if you can fly it before you can fly it after the patch, and this is an extreme corner case scenario. But what if i have BC at 5 and no cruiser skills does one just lose those skill points?

And yes i realize that it probably will not happen like that but i am extremely new and curious if i am going to go for this i want to go for the longest training first to get it out of the way and if it happens there isnt enough time do i just lose my points?
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#218 - 2012-11-06 18:32:39 UTC
For the Tiericide work on BSs, have you considered making a ship that might be better for small gang, one better for large fleet, and one better for medium/support stuff?

I got a Feature Added!

Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn".  It is "uh-bad-in" dictionary.com/abaddon
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#219 - 2012-11-06 18:36:20 UTC
Aaaargg. Raises! Raises the question.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Reticle
Sight Picture
#220 - 2012-11-06 18:39:55 UTC
Quote:
With this in mind, it becomes quite obvious to focus on training the Destroyers and Battlecruisers skills before the change to get the maximum return effect. We highly recommend you start doing so now.

Translation: this change will be made on Dec 4th