These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Reasons why boosters side effects should remain in-game

Author
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#21 - 2011-11-20 22:54:12 UTC
Postradamus wrote:
1. With no drawbacks, boosters will soon become a required part of being in a good fleet. FCs will demand their use or face being put at an inevitable disadvantage. Do we really want to add another thing that has to be done before we can get out there and have fun? If everyone uses boosters, what is the point? I DON'T WANT A BUNCH OF EXTRA CLICKS BEFORE I CAN GO HAVE FUN.


If everyone uses scouts, what's the point of having them. I DON'T WANT TO FLY A SECOND ACCOUNT ON SCREEN #2 BEFORE I CAN GO HAVE FUN.

Basically, you can apply that logic to anything everyone does - like fitting turrets on their ships...


Quote:

2. Effort vs. reward. The way things are now, boosters can be great, but you gotta put the effort in. It's one of EvE's nice little quirky things; you can get an advantage, but you gotta know what you are doing, you gotta actually do some work. That's the way it should be!


Where's the effort in that? Either you had a side effect that conflicted with the fittings concept and stayed docked or you didn't.

Quote:

3. Immersion. Why are these things illegal? Take the side effects away and they're just a buff item. Congratulations, you've made EvE just a little less real.



I don't think smoking weed is outlawed because of carcinogenic effects, but becausae of th desired ones.



But I'll give you one thing: Boosters used to be mainly a thing for solo pilots because if an FC ordered his fleet and 1/4 of them would have to stay docked because of side effects, it was too much of a drawback.
For a solo pilot, it's either go or log off - that advantage is gone for soloers now.

Not much of an issue since solo is dead anyway though...
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Mistress Lilu
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#22 - 2011-11-21 02:16:17 UTC
change the boosters...
why you fellas mad yo..
Aamrr
#23 - 2011-11-21 02:33:38 UTC
I'd rather that one of the skills provided a 20% reduction in the chance side-effects would occur. Let them have side-effects, but let dedicated pilots remove them entirely with training.

Seems a reasonable compromise to me, and far better than another pointless duration extension...
Jonas Xiamon
#24 - 2011-11-21 03:03:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonas Xiamon
This change to boosters is silly, it's going from one extreme to the other. Perhaps there should be a more powerful version of synths with no penalties, perhaps the penalties should be reduced over all, but they shouldn't be removed...

What is it +30-40% for the best boosters? That's far too high to come with no set backs...

Drop it down a bit, and maybe add another set of skills that increases they're usefulness in addition to another set of skills that reduces penalties.

I usally write one of these and then change it a month later when I reread it and decide it sounds stupid.

Zoe Alarhun
The Proactive Reappropriation Corporation
#25 - 2011-11-21 05:05:43 UTC
Can someone please post DEV post where they listing the changes ? Or linky. Thanks.
Mekhana
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-11-21 05:07:24 UTC
Eve Online: The Crucible.

Rated M for mature.

Vide longe er eros di Luminaire VII, uni canse pra krage e determiniex! Sange por Sange! Descanse bravex eros, mie freires. Mortir por vostre Liberete, farmilie, ide e amis. lons Proviste sen mort! Luminaire liber mas! 

rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#27 - 2011-11-21 07:07:53 UTC
If you guys do raise enough good points I am sure CCP might tone them down, they usually do when its on sisi and things are OP or maybe not as good as envisioned yet. But also think OP proved that no one was really ususing boosters too much, and now they can be used now at least. But if they dont make armor rigs easier to use and no penalties why make boosters easier to use and such I dont know.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Vachir Khan
Rugged Ruff and Ready
#28 - 2011-11-21 07:51:37 UTC
Jonas Xiamon wrote:
This change to boosters is silly, it's going from one extreme to the other. Perhaps there should be a more powerful version of synths with no penalties, perhaps the penalties should be reduced over all, but they shouldn't be removed...

What is it +30-40% for the best boosters? That's far too high to come with no set backs...

Drop it down a bit, and maybe add another set of skills that increases they're usefulness in addition to another set of skills that reduces penalties.


This really. Zero drawback boosters without rebalancing them around that fact is ********.
Elrich Kouvo
Doomheim
#29 - 2011-11-21 08:34:45 UTC
Takseen wrote:
Postradamus wrote:
1. With no drawbacks, boosters will soon become a required part of being in a good fleet. FCs will demand their use or face being put at an inevitable disadvantage. Do we really want to add another thing that has to be done before we can get out there and have fun? If everyone uses boosters, what is the point? I DON'T WANT A BUNCH OF EXTRA CLICKS BEFORE I CAN GO HAVE FUN.


Can people see if you've taken boosters? If not, I wouldn't worry. Until the raidle...fleet commanders develop an addon that checks everyone for their buf...boosters, anyway.
LOL FC **** test!
Apollo-Moor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2011-11-21 11:19:51 UTC
Taking away penalties completley probably wasn't/isn't the best idea out there. They could've started by making the production of them a bit easier. Maybe a change of gas sites or perhaps just more variety within regions. So far the hardest part about boosters is the manufacturering.

I find boosters a lot more interesting with the chance for side-effects. If some chump decided to pop an Improved without proper skills they should have the chance for a serious side-effect not just instant +30% to a skill because it honestly is a huge benefit for no real risk.

If this is what they plan on doing completley its going to be a little mad house with the booster thing and PvP, some were even usuable for PvE purposes. Just removing bad effects from them entirely tho. Is just lazy by the CCP development team..

Just lazy...
Errastas
Fate Amenable To Change
#31 - 2011-11-21 11:46:19 UTC
Yes, reverse this terrible change. Add new boosters or something, don't touch the current ones. They're balanced and with this you're nerfing active tanking to hell.

This change simply isn't the right way to make people use drugs more... Cool
DarkAegix
Acetech Systems
#32 - 2011-11-21 12:01:26 UTC
Errastas wrote:
They're balanced and with this you're nerfing active tanking to hell.

Wouldn't it be a buff? Improvements to Exile & Blue Pill boosters will make active tanking more viable.


What I'm waiting for now is sale of boosters in high-sec (Shadily, with an extra price) or a fixing of lowsec so more market hubs for boosters are created.
Errastas
Fate Amenable To Change
#33 - 2011-11-21 12:37:49 UTC
DarkAegix wrote:
Errastas wrote:
They're balanced and with this you're nerfing active tanking to hell.

Wouldn't it be a buff? Improvements to Exile & Blue Pill boosters will make active tanking more viable.

Penalties were removed so that's a buff, but their effectiveness has been reduced greatly. Especially on standard/improved variants which most people use (due to high price of strong boosters).

So now CCP forces people to use 25m pills to get similar effectiveness they had before for 5m (estimate, don't have exact figures at hand).

Boosters were a niche of solo and small gang pvpers and CCP wants to rid of that. It's a worthy cause, but not this way. Making them a mandatory isk sink while at the same time nerfing certain playstyles can ruin the overall game balance.
MaiLina KaTar
Katar Corp
#34 - 2011-11-21 13:00:28 UTC  |  Edited by: MaiLina KaTar
Tippia wrote:
Logit Probit wrote:
Hey CCP: I'll spell it out for you.

PEOPLE DID INDEED ASK YOU TO CHANGE BOOSTERS
Fixed.

More specifically, some felt that it was a niche part of the industry side of EVE and wanted to see both increased usage and increased opportunities to produce the stuff.

Buffing them to the point where they're a prerequisite to pvp accomplishes that goal, yes, to the detriment of everyone else. We had that already in WoW and it didn't work. Grinding your ass off for buffs wasn't fun, never will be.

Akita T wrote:
I might agree that SOME level of side-effects should still exist for NON-MAXIMALLY-SKILLED people. But you should be able to nullify most if not all side-effects with either maxed-out skills or nearly maxed skills and a handful of implants.

Why? And how wouldn't this create yet another barrier to new pvp players? CCP took learning skills out precisely because having so many mandatory timesinks is not fun gameplay. It's just a timesink, boring, useless.

Large Collidable Object wrote:
If everyone uses scouts, what's the point of having them. I DON'T WANT TO FLY A SECOND ACCOUNT ON SCREEN #2 BEFORE I CAN GO HAVE FUN.

Basically, you can apply that logic to anything everyone does - like fitting turrets on their ships...

Apples and oranges. Ships, turrets i.e. equipment isn't temporary. It lasts until it explodes. Ammo is comparable, yes. It's not as insanely powerful as boosters without side effects, though.


So yeah... if you take away the malus you have to nerf the bonus. Otherwise everyone, especially the .0 alliance folk, will whine their asses off within about a month or two after this is released.
Billy Colorado
Evasion Gaming
#35 - 2011-11-21 14:15:11 UTC
I don't know if I like this or not yet, 'cause I think it's going to take some playing to see how people react.

More than anything, this change impacts the industry that creates boosters. If side effects were prohibitive before, I imagine price will be now.
Tetragammatron Prime
Pink Sockers
#36 - 2011-11-21 15:09:44 UTC
Imo boosters without side effects just turns them into another hoop you have to jump through to pvp, same thing with leadership character being virtually required to pvp even in very small scale 1v1 fighting.
MaiLina KaTar
Katar Corp
#37 - 2011-11-21 21:57:05 UTC
Billy Colorado wrote:
'cause I think it's going to take some playing to see how people react.

No. Not at all.

Look around the gaming world. This has been done before and it failed every time. Nobody, except for the lunatic Korean / Chinese crowd who seem to have a perverse love for bordlerine sadistic grindgames, enjoys having to grind consumables just to be able to compete.

Mechanics like this add completely unneeded timesinks and entry barriers. Game designers all over the world realized and stopped putting this stupid bullshit into their games, to the delight of gamers everywhere.

Hopefully CCP's heads in their ivory tower will catch up soon enough.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#38 - 2011-11-21 22:55:44 UTC
MaiLina KaTar wrote:
Akita T wrote:
I might agree that SOME level of side-effects should still exist for NON-MAXIMALLY-SKILLED people. But you should be able to nullify most if not all side-effects with either maxed-out skills or nearly maxed skills and a handful of implants.

Why? And how wouldn't this create yet another barrier to new pvp players? CCP took learning skills out precisely because having so many mandatory timesinks is not fun gameplay. It's just a timesink, boring, useless.

If you go THAT logic route and bring it to its logical extreme, you could end up arguing that ALL skills in the game are a boring, useless timesink and should be obliterated.
Sure, it might be fun for a while to be able to use any ship, weapon, module, item and just about anything else from character creation to its highest possible efficiency, but then THAT would become boring rather fast too (and devolve into a much more raw "who has more ISK" thing than it already is).

It becomes obvious that there's some arbitrary line you must draw in the sand and not cross when slashing allegedly "boring stuff" out.
Which means, for starters, that we need to at least determine which things belong on which side of that imaginary line.

The case of learning skills was far more complicated than that of boosters, complicated enough to put it rather clearly on the "boring enough to slash" side.
Learning skills didn't actually improve anything you could do in-game, they just increased the speed of SP accrual, and regardless of path chosen, in the long run, the best choice was to get them as high as you can stand waiting as soon as possible (with the last levels taking several YEARS to actually "pay off"), which meant that the indisputable MATHEMATICALLY better choice for almost any profession was to waste time early on buffing learnings at the expense of "fun".

For boosters however, or just about any ship / weapon / other module / rig / whatever (with rather few exceptions) several levels of a skill would either grant access to some new items or improve the functionality of already "unlocked" items, giving you a tangible benefit over not training that skill level.
It also makes different items be worth different amounts for different people, which is more of a good than a bad thing too.
All in all, linking effectiveness of boosters and severity/duration of side-effects from them with some skill levels makes sense.
My personal nitpick is with the randomness though. In my opinion, you should not have random effects, just fixed effects. But that's just a personal preference.
MaiLina KaTar
Katar Corp
#39 - 2011-11-22 09:11:40 UTC  |  Edited by: MaiLina KaTar
Akita T wrote:
MaiLina KaTar wrote:
Akita T wrote:
I might agree that SOME level of side-effects should still exist for NON-MAXIMALLY-SKILLED people. But you should be able to nullify most if not all side-effects with either maxed-out skills or nearly maxed skills and a handful of implants.

Why? And how wouldn't this create yet another barrier to new pvp players? CCP took learning skills out precisely because having so many mandatory timesinks is not fun gameplay. It's just a timesink, boring, useless.

If you go THAT logic route and bring it to its logical extreme, you could end up arguing that ALL skills in the game are a boring, useless timesink and should be obliterated.
...
It becomes obvious that there's some arbitrary line you must draw in the sand and not cross when slashing allegedly "boring stuff" out.

Yes. And in general that line is already drawn and crossed for Eve. There are more than enough of these entry barriers in place for new people. This game really doesn't need more of them. On the contrary, lots of them should be axed before it dies of old age.

Again, look around the gaming world. The times of "grind until you start speaking chinese" and "fake longevity through timesinks" have long since passed. Gamedesign moved on. Nobody liked this ****. Nobody ever will.
Previous page12