These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: 28 Ships Later: Ship and Module Balancing in Odyssey 1.1

First post
Author
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#21 - 2013-08-27 16:46:31 UTC
CCP Gargant wrote:
Please note: The title of the last section does in no way reflect actual CCP policy.

damage control activated Blink

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Zeus Maximo
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
#22 - 2013-08-27 16:55:15 UTC
Really looking forward to the local armor rep bonus.

The Kronos will be my new home :)

(This means CCP isn't supposed to nerf its combat skills this winter)

(Buffs are welcome anytime)

"It is not possible either to trick or escape the mind of Zeus."

U-MAD Membership Recruitment

PoH Corporation Recruitment

NullRazor
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2013-08-27 16:56:04 UTC
Um..
I think you left out The following:
T2 Ammo: The penalties on most of it make it far less appealing to use then the faction counterpart.
Heavy Missiles: Heavy missile have been nerfed into the ground and need serious work.
Electronic Attack Frigates: After the T1 Frigate pass, these ship are extremely broken.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#24 - 2013-08-27 17:03:03 UTC
Capqu wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Capqu wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
When are you nerfing links?


i suggest you go look at the link thread a little closer friend


Those changes will not fix the problem.


that's an opinion, however it doesn't change the fact that they are nerfing links


Enough that you can call it a nerf, not enough to actually do anything. Kind of like the other recent nerfs.
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#25 - 2013-08-27 17:04:22 UTC
don't forget the interceptors, they could use a little balance pass also, such as a little extra lock range, and maybe a little more pg on a select few of them (ehp and such is fine already)

:#

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934

Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#26 - 2013-08-27 17:05:32 UTC
Why is everyone using this Dev Blog comment section to suggest future balancing? There's an entire subforum for features and ideas. I know! Who knew?

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Zeus Maximo
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
#27 - 2013-08-27 17:28:41 UTC
I never know if I'm ever heard or not on the forums so I say thank you by plexing my account. I also don't respond to feature discussion threads unless a dev is continuously responding to players. Very hard to get heard in this game. Might as well advertise it :)

"It is not possible either to trick or escape the mind of Zeus."

U-MAD Membership Recruitment

PoH Corporation Recruitment

Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
#28 - 2013-08-27 17:40:01 UTC
Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.

All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#29 - 2013-08-27 17:45:57 UTC
CCP Gargant wrote:
Please note: The title of the last section does in no way reflect actual CCP policy.


I said the rebalance is free, not the game subscription :)

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#30 - 2013-08-27 17:47:51 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.

All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended.


Just because one doesn't agree with every single person's suggestion doesn't mean feedback is being ignored. We take everything posted into consideration. At the end of the day, our jobs are do what's best for the game using our best judgement, and often that means differing from what some specific players want.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Zeus Maximo
Mentally Assured Destruction
The Pursuit of Happiness
#31 - 2013-08-27 17:55:28 UTC
I do suppose it is hard to know what to do considering every single player has their own agenda. Realistically though there will always be someone better. Does it make it right to nerf the stuff that THEY are good with? Assuming someone is good because of a crutch is one thing. Failing to realize that they will prevail no matter what and haters will still complain is another. The bad players know that if they complain enough CCP will coddle them. In every game bad players never stick around. Good players still need to be rewarded too.

"It is not possible either to trick or escape the mind of Zeus."

U-MAD Membership Recruitment

PoH Corporation Recruitment

Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
#32 - 2013-08-27 18:07:40 UTC
Nighthawk's slot layout is still bad.

With 7/5/5 it has an extra low that's just wasted space. Compared to the other shield tanked missile CS, the Claymore (which has 7/6/4), the Nighthawk is slower, less maneuverable, has less local rep potential (due to the Claymore's bonus), and can fit a buffer that's only marginally larger than the Claymore's (due to the Claymore's extra mid). They also have comparable DPS when the Claymore's drones are considered, the Nighthawk is tighter on fittings, and the Claymore has a smaller sig.

There's no reason at all to bring a Nighthawk instead of a Claymore right now. The extra low is useless. Nano? It still can't keep up with the claymore, so it will get benched in nimble fleets. 4th BCS? Adds only a marginal amount of dps. SPR? Only useful for PvE, and another mid would be more useful for shield regen tanking anyway (LSE adds more than an SPR with fewer downsides). Coproc? Not very necessary since if you're going for an XLASB fit you're better off with the claymore anyway. Only possibly needed because the Nighthawk's fittings are still not that great.

The Claymore, OTOH, could make good use of a 5th low for the coproc to fit an XLASB.

Drake is 7/6/4 with resist bonus, Cyclone is 7/5/5 with rep bonus. Those two ships are reasonably balanced against each other. So why are their T2 counterparts' slot layouts reversed, giving the tank advantage firmly to the Claymore?
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#33 - 2013-08-27 18:18:35 UTC
Chris Winter wrote:
Those two ships are reasonably balanced against each other. So why are their T2 counterparts' slot layouts reversed, giving the tank advantage firmly to the Claymore?


Because fozzie said so Sad
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
#34 - 2013-08-27 18:36:23 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
Not happy about many of the changes and feedback given in those threads.

All ignored, like many other valid posters - glad to see CCP still working as intended.


Just because one doesn't agree with every single person's suggestion doesn't mean feedback is being ignored. We take everything posted into consideration. At the end of the day, our jobs are do what's best for the game using our best judgement, and often that means differing from what some specific players want.


Not having a dig at you personally, just from my perspective after writing pages and pages of feedback it looks like you post a set of changes with your minds completely made up.
It is very rare you actually alter your position, which is either you being supremely confident of your changes or just being stubborn - for you sake I hope its the former.

I won't personally bother posting regarding changes in future anyway. It doesn't feel like a good use of time.
Castelo Selva
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#35 - 2013-08-27 18:43:57 UTC
Excellent work CCP Fozzie, CCP Rise and team. Congratulation to all .
I am very happy with all changes (even the gang link ones), so please do not get me wrong but...

Where are the command ship hull changes?

We still want it!
MisterNick
The Sagan Clan
#36 - 2013-08-27 18:57:04 UTC
GG Dominix, you overdid it in the Alliance Tournament old friend.

Now your drones will occasionally actually miss targets Lol

"Human beings make life so interesting. Do you know that in a universe so full of wonders, they have managed to invent boredom."

Luc Chastot
#37 - 2013-08-27 19:17:33 UTC
3 months for this?

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#38 - 2013-08-27 19:34:24 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
When are you nerfing links?


Your question is flawed:

It should say, why aren't you nerfing links more!!!!!

Links are straight up broken, and extremely detrimental to solo and small gang PvP!
Josef Djugashvilis
#39 - 2013-08-27 19:41:45 UTC
Whatever the changes, we shall adapt, and six months from now, most of us will have forgotten what the old ships were like.

This is not a signature.

Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct
Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
#40 - 2013-08-27 20:26:29 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Little known fact: Miley Cyrus' hit song "We Can't Stop" was entirely based upon the story of CCP's balance team.

Our deepest apologies.



Well, you had to top incarna some how for bad game design decisions. Mission Accomplished