These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Strategic Cruisers and You

First post
Author
Apollo Zhukov
Omicron Defense Corporation
#21 - 2017-05-26 18:33:11 UTC
Noxisia Arkana wrote:
Thanks for including me, I'll try to bring valuable advice and work with a couple group's I know to get some opinions. I'll even pull out the ol' graphing calculator if needed.


Good luck. I hope for the best. I don't want anyone to have a ship that was worse than before.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#22 - 2017-05-26 19:15:41 UTC
Toxic Fuzz wrote:
I have noticed that CCP seems to be forcing people to play in Corporations, gearing all new content towards that end, pushing those of us who enjoy being solo players into a position where we will not advance or being to engage new content unless we join a corporation and play in mobs.

This has ultimately ruined most 1vs1 combat where groups gank singular players now instead of engaging in combat as it used to be.

It has created massive gate camps where the only way they can be avoided is to fit a Strategic Cruiser with interdiction nullification.

It has just about ruined gameplay for those of us who seek to be individuals, solo hunters/pirates, players with a mind geared towards a different type of gameplay.

And now, the one ship that seems to even those odds, that still allows individuals to be so is being ruined. Just like all other ships that have been used by singular players, CCP is now proposing once again to nerf, to ruin a ship that some of us have been piloting for years and have focused all our training towards that end.

It's always the people who cry the most that get the most attention from CCP. Interdiction pilots who set up bubbles and believe they should be able to effectively block all traffic, capture and destroy all players gating through a specific gate they camp with their corp are crying about the only ship that can make it through their gate camps without concern for their blocking traffic. And because of their childish complaints, I cannot believe this by it seems CCP is now considering removing interdiction nullification.

For every offensive strategy their should be a counter defensive strategy. For every mod that enables a ship to pin or capture another ship, there should be a counter. If interdiction nullification is removed, then interdiction pilots will not be able to be countered by a ship or mode. That is not fair gameplay and will tip the game mechanics in favor of interdiction pilots.

There are players who enjoy being able to play stealthy, to avoid forced battles and to be able to pick and choose their battles based on their STRATEGIC ability. Who enjoy being solo pirates, or who enjoy being able to enter a system and carefully plot and plan their way around all the offensive positions that attempt to catch them. It's the old game of cat and mouse. And yet, CCP again seems to be ignoring these players, and instead focused on forcing conflicts, forcing fights when this cat and mouse type play is so exhilarating.

If CCP goes through with changing these ships into something they are currently not. If they wish to de-evolve them into just another cruiser, if they are going to ruin solo gameplay or the ability to do combat sights solo, or all the other things the larger sig radius will ruin, the interdiction nullification removal will ruin, the reduction in the distance damage can be applied then there should be an option to recover those skill points so that they can be applied towards other things. Because honestly, these are the exact reasons why many of us have spent years of game play perfecting our skills in regards to strategic cruisers.

If CCPs ultimate goal is to ruin solo gameplay, I think they should come out and state it so, instead of silently removing all options for solo play, and forcing fights where they use to allow an option for a different type of gameplay.

You cannot rightfully give someone a benefit on a particular ship, and then remove it all together. Doing so is equal to giving someone a benefit and then taking it away, effectively punishing those people for exploiting those benefits. If interdiction nullification is removed, then it should be added to another ship, there has to be some way that people can avoid interdiction, their must be a counter. If not, then you effectively trap players in systems and ruin their entire style of gameplay.

I for one, will discontinue playing EVE Online if there is no interdiction nullification, if CCP removes the very reasons why I have used strategic cruisers for so many years, if there are no other options or ways I can continue to play the game I so very much love in the way I love to play it. I suspect many others will do exactly the same.

TO say the very least I am not happy at all with the new suggested changes. Yet again just as with other ships it seems that CCP's true intent is to force people to join corporations, force people to play in mobs, force people to engage when otherwise they would prefer playing a different way, and to ruin ships that have a place in the game. And to leave wide gaping holes in a universe that if real would never allow them, would naturally fill those gaping holes with ships that excel at solo gameplay.

All new content, ships, changes, nerfs, "re-balancing" seem to be geared towards forcing solo players out of the game. It's been this way for years and it doesn't seem like it's going to change anytime soon. I fear that I am going to be looking for a new MMORPG to play in the very near future.


Had you read the post, you would have seen this:

"Some power reductions to long range combat alongside the nullification subsystem"

Also, it was shown at Fanfest that the nullification -subsystem is still among their planned modules.

Wormholer for life.

Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#23 - 2017-05-26 19:23:06 UTC
Bring back Loki skull !!1!

Good news lets see this thru sooner rather than later.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard

Iakim Akrelthor
Skipper Logistics
#24 - 2017-05-26 19:25:52 UTC
Love it. A nice kick to the sandbox is healthy, and T3C had it coming.

We currently have to train six T3C skills to pilot them. Will there be a skill reimbursement, or the new Subsystems will require two (or more) skills to be able to use them?
BESTER bm
Doomheim
#25 - 2017-05-26 19:34:13 UTC
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Quote:
The current state of T3 Cruisers is unsustainable from a technical graphics perspective

What do you mean by that? Some graphic rework?


CCP can't monetize skins due to the current design of the T3D .. they want your $$
Karl Jerr
Herzack Unit
#26 - 2017-05-26 19:37:12 UTC
The ability to swap the rig without destroying them will be pretty cool.
I'll wait to see about damage changes, but since I do L4 mission with a Proteus, and it isn't considered efficent, it will not change my fun BearBig smile
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#27 - 2017-05-26 19:38:42 UTC
BESTER bm wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Quote:
The current state of T3 Cruisers is unsustainable from a technical graphics perspective

What do you mean by that? Some graphic rework?


CCP can't monetize skins due to the current design of the T3D .. they want your $$

Lol

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#28 - 2017-05-26 19:42:06 UTC
As mentioned earlier I also think it would be a better idea to fix slot layouts and simply use the subs to apply % increases to stats instead
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#29 - 2017-05-26 20:05:22 UTC
So, what about 3rd weapon sub for Legion?

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison

Firicel
Broscarii Veseli
#30 - 2017-05-26 20:43:13 UTC
I would like my skill points back please, seems to me you want to nerf them to the point they will become unusable. For a 1yo pilot, spending months of training into a tengu which soon will become unusable is a lot. How you manage to shoot yourself in the foot with each patch, it's beyond my imagination really.
Rorq, now plexes which price exploded as expected, next t3 cruisers, what's after that, platforms, right? well, gg
How about an event, to keep people in the game? When was the last one, December?
Anyway, a sincere FO from me.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#31 - 2017-05-26 20:53:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Quote:
The current state of T3 Cruisers is unsustainable from a technical graphics perspective

What do you mean by that? Some graphic rework?

it takes months to implement any gfx changes on them ,
the art team refers to them as "divas" from time to time because of the volume of extra work needed
to get them working with even a shader,
never mind the qaWhat?
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#32 - 2017-05-26 20:55:27 UTC
Yes, worth the wait.

At this rate we might even get atmospheric flight when Star Citizen launches Bear

Regards, a Freelancer

ps: don't make the Tengu suck

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#33 - 2017-05-26 21:12:24 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Quote:
The current state of T3 Cruisers is unsustainable from a technical graphics perspective

What do you mean by that? Some graphic rework?

it takes months to implement any gfx changes on them ,
the art team refers to them as "divas" from time to time because of the volume of extra work needed
to get them working with even a shader,
never mind the qaWhat?

I was thinking something like T3D for graphics.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville

Lexx Devi
Freeport . 7
#34 - 2017-05-26 21:22:47 UTC
Hmm,
Remove rigs all together? Yes, Yes, You do like the idea, Yes.

Then
Buff the bonuses of each Subsystem.
Give the T3 Cruiser Hulls a 10% bonus to storyline modules.
Cypherous
Liberty Rogues
Aprilon Dynasty
#35 - 2017-05-26 21:39:32 UTC
Firicel wrote:
I would like my skill points back please, seems to me you want to nerf them to the point they will become unusable. For a 1yo pilot, spending months of training into a tengu which soon will become unusable is a lot. How you manage to shoot yourself in the foot with each patch, it's beyond my imagination really.
Rorq, now plexes which price exploded as expected, next t3 cruisers, what's after that, platforms, right? well, gg
How about an event, to keep people in the game? When was the last one, December?
Anyway, a sincere FO from me.


If they remove a subsystem altogether and the skill for that subsystem you'll get a refund of the SP invested in the removed skill, but only the removed ones
Catherine Laartii
E.C.H.O.
Warped Intentions
#36 - 2017-05-26 22:40:47 UTC
BESTER bm
Doomheim
#37 - 2017-05-26 22:42:58 UTC

CCP will nerf the nullification to the point where it's useless to keep the gate gankers happy. They will make it a nessicity to bring additional modules when travelling solo as the nerf will not allow for a solid all round fit, the T3C will be nerfed into a 'fly as a group' fit.

How many of the players in the focus group are solo roamers or explorers?

Seeing how CCP wrecked the map and the DSCAN/Probe scan system I can only hope they will not break the T3C to the point where it wil lbe waste of time.

Exploration sites which now basically require the T3C will get run less, prices for the modules made using the drops in these sites will soar.. all in the interest of moving players to invest plex and with that $$

CCP is not working in the player interest here IMO, the endgoal here is still to drive players to invest and raise the CCP net worth to optimize the chance of a buyout.
Elenahina
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2017-05-26 22:51:56 UTC
BESTER bm wrote:

CCP will nerf the nullification to the point where it's useless to keep the gate gankers happy. They will make it a nessicity to bring additional modules when travelling solo as the nerf will not allow for a solid all round fit, the T3C will be nerfed into a 'fly as a group' fit.

How many of the players in the focus group are solo roamers or explorers?

Seeing how CCP wrecked the map and the DSCAN/Probe scan system I can only hope they will not break the T3C to the point where it wil lbe waste of time.

Exploration sites which now basically require the T3C will get run less, prices for the modules made using the drops in these sites will soar.. all in the interest of moving players to invest plex and with that $$

CCP is not working in the player interest here IMO, the endgoal here is still to drive players to invest and raise the CCP net worth to optimize the chance of a buyout.


You may need to loosen your tinfoil hat just a smidge.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

Circumstantial Evidence
#39 - 2017-05-26 23:02:10 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Quote:
The current state of T3 Cruisers is unsustainable from a technical graphics perspective
What do you mean by that? Some graphic rework?
it takes months to implement any gfx changes on them ,
the art team refers to them as "divas" from time to time because of the volume of extra work needed
to get them working with even a shader,
never mind the qaWhat?
And the problem they described was texturing the model, because it changes depending on subsystems. Speculation: will CCP do away with that, and pick one fixed shape for each tech 3 cruiser? That would make the graphic artist's work much easier.
Ben Ishikela
#40 - 2017-05-26 23:29:07 UTC
Please a FleetHangarThing for additional Fits. now that rigs are changeable. Proteus always struggled with carrying refits.
Please afterburnerbonus on all ships possible.

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.