These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: Ship balancing summer update

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sidus Isaacs
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2012-06-14 17:24:44 UTC
Nice to see CCP and EVE on the important Internet spaceship path again! :)
Maul555
Xen Investments
#302 - 2012-06-14 17:25:45 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Maul555 wrote:
If ccp adds ore hold expanders and rigs, this would fix a lot of problems. also add a lot more options to orcas...


They arn't



They might ^^

/me stares at CCP Shocked
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#303 - 2012-06-14 17:26:25 UTC
I figured this would eventually end up as some sperg-fest with miners claiming "tears" and making all sorts of baseless, idiotic claims, and I'm sad to see I'm right. Oh well, guess I'll just wait for all this to hit Sisi.

Definitely going to train for that mining frigate though, at the very least just to fly it around.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#304 - 2012-06-14 17:30:05 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
I figured this would eventually end up as some sperg-fest with miners claiming "tears" and making all sorts of baseless, idiotic claims, and I'm sad to see I'm right. Oh well, guess I'll just wait for all this to hit Sisi.

Definitely going to train for that mining frigate though, at the very least just to fly it around.


Ironicly its miners who are shedding the most tearsUgh
ostar ostar
Perkone
Caldari State
#305 - 2012-06-14 17:30:43 UTC
All awesome, awesome changes, but please, just one suggestion:

DON'T GIVE THE BARGES AN ACTIVE TANK BONUS

Why? Because it's gratifyingly hard to repair your shield/armor when an artillery tornado just turned your (puny) buffer tank to space dust, that's why. All the logistics in the world cannot save you from an instant, huge hit that is more than your total EHP.

Oh, and thread was a little tl;dr, so sorry if this has been answered, but the blog states that Mining Barge I is enough to fly all T1 barges. Does the Exhumers skill apply likewise to Exhumers? If not, i have no complaint, although it will make the skill tree arrangement look a little odd.

Keep up the good work guys!
Swearte Widfarend
Ever Vigilant Fountain Defenders
#306 - 2012-06-14 17:30:45 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
I figured this would eventually end up as some sperg-fest with miners claiming "tears" and making all sorts of baseless, idiotic claims, and I'm sad to see I'm right. Oh well, guess I'll just wait for all this to hit Sisi.

Definitely going to train for that mining frigate though, at the very least just to fly it around.


Did you read the same thread I did?

I haven't seen tons of baseless, idiotic claims or tears (except for a few who really want the hulk to have the BS tank).

This discussion is much more reasonable than the Sisi Wardec thread...

Democracy is only as good as the despot managing the voting booth.
Henry Haphorn
Killer Yankee
#307 - 2012-06-14 17:33:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Henry Haphorn
Weaselior wrote:
yeah im not sure why anyone thinks we'd be upset about this: the people who would fly the tanked barges are flying battleships right now

this just gives us new reasons to mock our victims

hell they'll probably take a skiff and fit it for max yield and in doing so make it still paper thin


This.

When it comes to events like Hulkageddon and the OTEC operation, I don't see how the Skiff or Procurer will help. In fact, seeing people mine in a Skiff or Procurer is such a rare thing their mere presence fascinates me still.

Also, considering that the Hulk's yield seems to stay the same, I don't see these changes as a problem.

Now, as a career miner, I would certainly have a problem if the exhumer class (particularly the Mack and Hulks) were ever given a mining yield buff as that would most certainly hurt mineral prices.

EDIT:

In addition to my Hulk comment, I also don't want to see any tank buffs on the Hulk as it is already capable of achieving over 30,000 EHP with the right skills and mods. Those who always complain about the Hulk's lack of tank happens to be those who always fit cargo rigs and cargo mods (these take away tank) then complain why a cruiser took out their Hulk.

Adapt or Die
Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#308 - 2012-06-14 17:33:28 UTC
Tippia wrote:


Denidil wrote:
even if it kept it's current bay

8000m3 primary, 8000m3 ore < good skills T1 hauler.
If it kept its current bay, it would be able to achieve 17k+ m³ primary + 8k m³ ore, which is well within the range of competing with industrial ships.


at a much higher cost.

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#309 - 2012-06-14 17:35:35 UTC
Swearte Widfarend wrote:
Did you read the same thread I did?

I haven't seen tons of baseless, idiotic claims or tears (except for a few who really want the hulk to have the BS tank).

The last couple of pages are pretty bad, especially all the crap about the Hulk's tank and cargo expanders and such. v0v

Swearte Widfarend wrote:
This discussion is much more reasonable than the Sisi Wardec thread...

Can't argue with you on that point. ******* tinfoil...

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#310 - 2012-06-14 17:36:13 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
disagree about the pace. They do need to get faster at this. They've already been hinting at it for a year. Then we got 5 frigs changed.What? Now we are looking at more years of waiting for the big problem areas to get addressed.Sad

For frigates racial homogenization is no big deal as long as the camel's nose under the tent syndrome doesn't take hold. With only 4 racial tech I cruisers, one being logi, one being ewar, it doesn't lend itself to each race having a drone boat or a missile boat. ANd then with only 3 BCs and 3 BSs there is little danger of homogenization up the chain.

A caldari drone frig and a Gallente missile frig is not a big deal. If it manages to avoid future whines on the forums for a Caldari drone Cruiser or BS or a Gallente missile cruiser or BS by providing experience and knowledge of other weapon systems, and inducing racial cross training to an individually preferred type it would be a positive. Too many posts are of the variety of "my weapon system sucks but his weapon system (with which I have no experience) sure looks better . . ."


Inertia is a hell of a thing Smile Now that they have the ball rolling they can get things out of the door easier. A lot of this time has been spent identifying the problem and deciding what direction to take. The actual implementation shouldn't take nearly as long. VS this summer we saw just one line of frigates changed, by winter we'll have 4 or 5 changed. From there it should quickened as things begin to get ironed out and focused.

I'm less concerned about a drone boat frig to introduce the concept, and more concerned with every race having a myrmidon or Arbitrator when they are not those races focus. I would gladly see the bay removed on all minmatar ships sub battleship. As was stated earlier by someone the Cane has no problems picking off frigates as it is, it doesn't need a drone bay for this.

We will likely see more battlecruisers, destroyers, and battleships added as the rebalance progresses, I don't want these to be the token drone boat support role per race. Its lazy and uncreative, and completely removes the heterogeneous nature of the races. Keep drones on Gallente, and a few Amarr boats.
Sanadras Riahn
Turbo Nuclear Pirate Punch
#311 - 2012-06-14 17:36:43 UTC
Loving the way the changes are looking so far! I like having everything have a very defined role. My only suggestion (and I think this was mentioned, but just to be sure) is to just flat out have the ship skills grant access to all ships of that race and class. Don't remove the pre-reqs for the next level of ship (Frigate 4 to get to Cruiser 1, etc), however. That way, access to every ship of every role, and you increase your ability with the class before progressing.

Tradition defines and shapes a person, but should be evaluated frequently; far too often does Tradition no longer help, but hobble a person and stunt their growth. Especially a Capsuleer.
Plato Idari
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#312 - 2012-06-14 17:36:51 UTC
I think these changes look very good.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#313 - 2012-06-14 17:37:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Maul555 wrote:
So if I want to semi-afk mine ore in highsec, I have to use a mackinaw now. and its my problem? mining ore in a mackinaw? that just seems pants on head ********.
Why is it ********? It'll be the best ship for the job. Picking the best ship rather than one that doesn't do the same job as well seems rather clever, I'd think…

Quote:
If ccp adds ore hold expanders and rigs, this would fix all the problems I can see.
What problems? Your refusal to fly any other ship than a Hulk isn't a game design problem — it's just you being stubborn.

Again, get out of the “Hulk is best — must use Hulk!” mindset and the problems you're having instantly vanish.

Denidil wrote:
at a much higher cost.
Doesn't matter.
Haifisch Zahne
Hraka Manufacture GmbH
#314 - 2012-06-14 17:40:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Haifisch Zahne
REMOVED TO PROTEST CCP's Community Censorship Protocol ("CCCP").
Maul555
Xen Investments
#315 - 2012-06-14 17:42:05 UTC
Karl Hobb wrote:
Swearte Widfarend wrote:
Did you read the same thread I did?

I haven't seen tons of baseless, idiotic claims or tears (except for a few who really want the hulk to have the BS tank).

The last couple of pages are pretty bad, especially all the crap about the Hulk's tank and cargo expanders and such. v0v

Swearte Widfarend wrote:
This discussion is much more reasonable than the Sisi Wardec thread...

Can't argue with you on that point. ******* tinfoil...



Pointing out what may be an unintentional operational nerf to Hulks, and a lesser extent Covetors, is not whining. Debating the merits of changes and giving the devs something to think about is what this forum is for.
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#316 - 2012-06-14 17:43:32 UTC
So the T1 frigates will be smaller versions of their T2 counterparts. Atron is a little Tyrannis. This is a pretty good idea. It'll let our newer member fit into roles without having to wait for a bunch of level 5 skills to train. I hope to see similar changes to the T1 cruisers.

Quote:
Resilience: another point is to give some of them proper EHP not to be one-shot by anything that even remotely sneezes on them.
I predict an incoming wave angry gankers.

Quote:
capable of having battleship-like EHP.
gird your loins! IT BEGINS!

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#317 - 2012-06-14 17:46:49 UTC
Wolodymyr wrote:
I predict an incoming wave angry gankers.
So far, the miners are the ones being angry, and the gankers have already figured out how to handle it… Blink

Plus ça change.
Maul555
Xen Investments
#318 - 2012-06-14 17:47:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Maul555
Tippia wrote:
Maul555 wrote:
So if I want to semi-afk mine ore in highsec, I have to use a mackinaw now. and its my problem? mining ore in a mackinaw? that just seems pants on head ********.
Why is it ********? It'll be the best ship for the job. Picking the best ship rather than one that doesn't do the same job as well seems rather clever, I'd think…


Quote:
If ccp adds ore hold expanders and rigs, this would fix all the problems I can see.
What problems? Your refusal to fly any other ship than a Hulk isn't a game design problem — it's just you being stubborn.

Again, get out of the “Hulk is best — must use Hulk!” mindset and the problems you're having instantly vanish.

Denidil wrote:
at a much higher cost.
Doesn't matter.


Mackinaws have always been Ice mining platforms because of bonuses, and Hulks for all Ores except Mercoxit. I understand that CCP is tryign to shake things up a bit, but it seems really wierd for a Mackinaw to be the "best choice" for mining ore in my playstyle, because CCP took away customizations options.

---

No. The problem is that CCP is forcing ore into a new bay that cannot be expanded. I am loosing operational space. This requires more attention to keep my lasers from automatically shutting off when the bay gets full. You cannot deny that they have taken away customizations options by forcing that stuff into an ore hold. That's what I am talking about. And that's the problem that ore bay expanders/rigs would solve.
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#319 - 2012-06-14 17:47:23 UTC
Maul555 wrote:
Pointing out what may be an unintentional operational nerf to Hulks, and a lesser extent Covetors, is not whining. Debating the merits of changes and giving the devs something to think about is what this forum is for.

Considering the ships are being re-purposed into new roles, I'd say it's not exactly an "unintentional operational nerf". Retriever/Mack will be the ship of choice for AFK solo mining, Hulk/Covetor for fleet mining (hence no real need for a bigger hold), Procurer/Skiff for specialized work and also for the paranoid. The ships will not have the same stats after this change.

In short, you're whining.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#320 - 2012-06-14 17:47:33 UTC
Haifisch Zahne wrote:
However, I will point out that I and many others wasted a lot of time training Destroyer and Battlecruiser to Lever V because of the announced changes when my neural map was just horrible for it. Something on the order of around 20 days. Wasted. Thanks.


Yes CCP made you remap and train up a skill because you failed to read what they said clearly in bold text multiple times, because you wanted to game a system to not have to train a skill later on.

Yeah, it's their fault.