These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

FW: rebalancing NPCs and you

First post First post
Author
Kalaratiri
Nobody in Local
Of Sound Mind
#381 - 2012-09-01 18:15:50 UTC
I am a huge fan of these changes, the making of a t1 frig only plex especially. That is a good thing!

She's mad but she's magic, there's no lie in her fire.

This is possibly one of the worst threads in the history of these forums.  - CCP Falcon

I don't remember when last time you said something that wasn't either dumb or absurd. - Diana Kim

Ava Starfire
Khushakor Clan
#382 - 2012-09-01 18:19:11 UTC
I cannot like this enough!

Dedicated plexes for T1 frigs only, thank you! Destroyers and a few types of faction frigs (Hookbill) dominate minors as it is, and T2 frigs are useless vs most cruisers (and rats) in mediums. Giving us two small-ship playgrounds, where all frigs and dessies will be of use, is just epic. Thank you.

T1 frigs are amazingly fun, so wonderful to see the new little plexes.

Most of the time, AF vs Destroyer is a good fight, especially if the destroyer can dictate starting range. It will be nice to force people to devote more thought to a plex boat than "Fit arty thrasher, win" though it is likely a couple classes of AFs (Vengeance, Hawk) will dominate here; AF balance is another issue altogether, however, and this is a great bunch of changes.

The changes to LP and upgrades, once again, made me actually squee a little when I read them.

Make this happen, please, and soon! The ONLY way this could be better is a T1 cruiser specific plex, do NOT go back to "T1 cruisers or AFs" as this just means "Use a cruiser" due to the uphill fight an AF has vs the holy trinity of neuts, webs, and drones.

Overall, based on what I have read, 9/10. Great work.

"There is no strength in numbers; have no such misconception." -Jayka Vofur, "Warfare in the North"

Starbuck Mulligann
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#383 - 2012-09-01 18:58:06 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

* Increase contested range: at the moment an hostile pilot will only contest a capture timer if he is within capture range (whose reach varies depending on the point above). We want to move the contested area to the whole complex range, which would mean as long as hostile pilot is within your room the capture timer would be paused.


As several people have already mentioned, a full grid contest range is going to be abused by 5k m/s frigs to prevent capture without engaging in PvP. I tried to think up options that would balance this (like allowing warp to squad in sites) but I think the best way to encourage pvp is to keep the contest range proportional to the capture range. A contest range of 2x the capture range might be the right balance.

I could see how this change might cause regression in how a cloaked ship effects the timer. Definitely want to test that on SiSi.

Shrinking the contest range over time is another interesting option.

X Gallentius
Easy Eight
#384 - 2012-09-01 19:07:12 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Quote:
* Complex size and name changes: current complex sizes are confusing as some major sites have no acceleration gates, while others do. Plan is to revamp sites to 4 sizes: rookie (only tech 1 frigates allowed, no navy, pirate or tech 2 variant), small (all small ships, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - essentially all frigates and destroyers), medium (all cruisers, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - battlecruiser variants are not allowed) and large (unrestricted access).


The more I think abou tthis the more I don't like it. There is nothing wrong with the current system. I read this as
L1: T1 frigs
L2: Sabres
L3: HACs, Recons, Logi
L4: Nanofag ships

1. After the rebalance T1 frigs are perfectly viable options in current L1 plexes. They are competitive with dessies.

2. Navy faction ships are currently inferior to their T2 counterparts. Their only advantage was their flexibility in getting into smaller plexes. This advantage is gone. IMO, FW should be all about faction navy ships since 1) they are faction navy ships for faction warfare and 2) they are given out at a discount to the LP store.

3. No room for T1 cruisers. T2 AHAC/Logi/Recon will rule the day in L3s.

4. Armor BCs are worthless, only more "open ocean" nanofaggotry. If you are going this way, then please put a warp in on L4s.

.Maybe it's fear of change. What do other FW players think of this change?
MotherMoon
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#385 - 2012-09-01 20:19:29 UTC
now please please trible or double the LP payout for killing another player in FW when defending your own sites.

That way you gain income from defending passively, but if you actually have to defend, you get huge rewards for winning.

http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg

Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#386 - 2012-09-01 22:10:23 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
I really like the low dps, fast NPCs with active repping idea.

Please clarify the following.

Quote:

* Increase contested range: at the moment an hostile pilot will only contest a capture timer if he is within capture range (whose reach varies depending on the point above). We want to move the contested area to the whole complex range, which would mean as long as hostile pilot is within your room the capture timer would be paused.


A "tie" goes to the faster ships that may have no incentive to engage. Super fast defender will sit on button aligned away. When opponent comes in he'll burn away and pick at targets, or just keep at range until the opponent gets bored. What is really a "win" for the attacker (they control the plex) turns into a loss (fast defender can grief with no risk). The advantage to the fast defender increases with capture range size.

Perhaps the capture timer range was originally set based on projected effective range of the ships that would enter the plex.


Yeah i'm fairly certain players should have to risk their ship to stop the ones who are in control from running the timers. Burning 200-300km around the button in a strictly speed fit ship isn't a "risk". Players should have to be MUCH closer to the button to contest.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#387 - 2012-09-02 00:07:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Garviel Tarrant
Excellent..

I can't think of a better way to express it

Tears will flow! Twisted


On a different note since CCP seems to be monitoring this thread.

Does CCP ever intend on including outlaws in the design of lowsec stuff? And by that i mean the real pvp sort of outlaw, not the instalock gatecamp sort.

While i don't think outlaws should be a big part of things like this i feel like they should have some consideration in all things low sec?

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#388 - 2012-09-02 00:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
Cearain wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Durrr wrote:
it will be at least 6 months (if not a year) before the cruisers get some love


Sure about that? Cool



Unless they are going to be able to compete with hacs its hard to see what place they will have in faction war.

These faction plex restriction changes seem like a big boost to t2 industry.


You mean, unless they can compete with the vagabond and zealot, only?

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#389 - 2012-09-02 01:16:19 UTC
chatgris wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
* Increase contested range: at the moment an hostile pilot will only contest a capture timer if he is within capture range (whose reach varies depending on the point above). We want to move the contested area to the whole complex range, which would mean as long as hostile pilot is within your room the capture timer would be paused.


So far I LOVE everything about this but this:

a) If the pilot goes "off grid" are they still considered in the plex zone? (To prevent an enemy player from just burning away in a 8k/s dramiel forever.

b) System defence is possible with a super nano ship that runs forever with offgrid boost. Mix this with the grid mechanics and it can get a little exploitable in the sense that defence is no longer pvp but "run around and around and around until the opponent gets bored".


Kudos on all changes, but this is the glaring problem I see. Now we will have nano+OD frigates orbiting at 100+. No one will be able to chase them off, making it impossible to offensively capture a plex. The FW exploit gang is already discussing it in W&T forum.

I know people were able to bug plexes in the prior iteration by going into the limited contesting range then 'locking' the timer somehow. So, if perhaps some coding limitation, could you just tie the plex closure to the killing of the last NPC?

That way the defender has to be actively fighting the attacker and kill/drive him off to defend the plex by preventing the the death of the last NPC until the defender runs his timer to zero. Dunno, just an idea.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#390 - 2012-09-02 01:17:45 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Cearain wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Durrr wrote:
it will be at least 6 months (if not a year) before the cruisers get some love


Sure about that? Cool



Unless they are going to be able to compete with hacs its hard to see what place they will have in faction war.

These faction plex restriction changes seem like a big boost to t2 industry.


You mean, unless they can compete with the vagabond and zealot, only?


Deimos at zero on warp in might cause a problem or 3...

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#391 - 2012-09-02 01:22:40 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Quote:
* Complex size and name changes: current complex sizes are confusing as some major sites have no acceleration gates, while others do. Plan is to revamp sites to 4 sizes: rookie (only tech 1 frigates allowed, no navy, pirate or tech 2 variant), small (all small ships, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - essentially all frigates and destroyers), medium (all cruisers, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - battlecruiser variants are not allowed) and large (unrestricted access).


The more I think abou tthis the more I don't like it. There is nothing wrong with the current system. I read this as
L1: T1 frigs
L2: Sabres
L3: HACs, Recons, Logi
L4: Nanofag ships

1. After the rebalance T1 frigs are perfectly viable options in current L1 plexes. They are competitive with dessies.

2. Navy faction ships are currently inferior to their T2 counterparts. Their only advantage was their flexibility in getting into smaller plexes. This advantage is gone. IMO, FW should be all about faction navy ships since 1) they are faction navy ships for faction warfare and 2) they are given out at a discount to the LP store.

3. No room for T1 cruisers. T2 AHAC/Logi/Recon will rule the day in L3s.

4. Armor BCs are worthless, only more "open ocean" nanofaggotry. If you are going this way, then please put a warp in on L4s.

.Maybe it's fear of change. What do other FW players think of this change?


Yes. I completely agree. A HUGE part of the charm and awesomeness of FW is that ALL ship sizes and classes get used. This change will eliminate T1 cruisers and destroyers among others. Currently, Pirate faction ships get used, but they are rare enough not to be unbalancing. I would rather keep the current restrictions over this suggested change.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#392 - 2012-09-02 01:23:08 UTC
Hrett wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Cearain wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Durrr wrote:
it will be at least 6 months (if not a year) before the cruisers get some love


Sure about that? Cool



Unless they are going to be able to compete with hacs its hard to see what place they will have in faction war.

These faction plex restriction changes seem like a big boost to t2 industry.


You mean, unless they can compete with the vagabond and zealot, only?


Deimos at zero on warp in might cause a problem or 3...



More like it would be an awesome kill ^^

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#393 - 2012-09-02 02:06:16 UTC
chatgris wrote:
Julius Foederatus wrote:
I'm with XG on the capture/contest range, making it 30km all around and being able to contest as soon as you're on grid gives a buff to kitey faggots that don't need any more buffs to their play style. Is there any reason why you guys don't want to make the timer run back when someone is not actively running it?


Well, it's just one more reason to stop flying useless blaster boats :)



Funny. I read it as just one more reason to nerf offgrid boosting. ;)

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!

Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#394 - 2012-09-02 02:44:43 UTC
Still not keen on the button location change. I keep coming back to max DPS ships just sat on the warp in. 

As for plex sizes

Rookie- I don't hate this although I feel it is not required.
Small- still feel assault ships are to strong but it is another small ship complex which I think is good.
Medium- really feel there should be a place for T1 cruisers. Feels a shame that they may get buffed especially the logi but still have to compete with T2.
Large- I would question whether this needs to be unrestricted. Allow all subcabs and move T2 cruisers here.

If people want to use caps then use them in taking the hubs. Or let the hubs act as a plex somehow.

An alternative may be to add a plex between medium (remove the tech 2 cruisers) and large and add T2 cruisers and battlecruisers (tech 1 only) here.

Don't want to many plex sizes though as then you never find the ones you want.
Roddex
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#395 - 2012-09-02 03:55:09 UTC
Any word on where Tech 3 fit into the planned system (at least the current plan)?
Dread Operative
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#396 - 2012-09-02 06:23:15 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Quote:
* Complex size and name changes: current complex sizes are confusing as some major sites have no acceleration gates, while others do. Plan is to revamp sites to 4 sizes: rookie (only tech 1 frigates allowed, no navy, pirate or tech 2 variant), small (all small ships, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - essentially all frigates and destroyers), medium (all cruisers, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - battlecruiser variants are not allowed) and large (unrestricted access).


The more I think abou tthis the more I don't like it. There is nothing wrong with the current system. I read this as
L1: T1 frigs
L2: Sabres
L3: HACs, Recons, Logi
L4: Nanofag ships

1. After the rebalance T1 frigs are perfectly viable options in current L1 plexes. They are competitive with dessies.

2. Navy faction ships are currently inferior to their T2 counterparts. Their only advantage was their flexibility in getting into smaller plexes. This advantage is gone. IMO, FW should be all about faction navy ships since 1) they are faction navy ships for faction warfare and 2) they are given out at a discount to the LP store.

3. No room for T1 cruisers. T2 AHAC/Logi/Recon will rule the day in L3s.

4. Armor BCs are worthless, only more "open ocean" nanofaggotry. If you are going this way, then please put a warp in on L4s.

.Maybe it's fear of change. What do other FW players think of this change?


I agree. The new changes to plex sizes will kill of CLASSES in FW. No reason for Faction Frigs in L2. No reason for Cruisers and some Faction Cruisers in L3. You can put 3 Logi in's a plex (which rep BS damage) and hold almost infinitely. 2 Vigilant's and 3 Guards could hold against a MUCH LARGER FORCE.

Keep the current plex size restrictions. Add a rookie if you must.
Juan Rayo
Justified Chaos
#397 - 2012-09-02 07:43:03 UTC
Dread Operative wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Quote:
* Complex size and name changes: current complex sizes are confusing as some major sites have no acceleration gates, while others do. Plan is to revamp sites to 4 sizes: rookie (only tech 1 frigates allowed, no navy, pirate or tech 2 variant), small (all small ships, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - essentially all frigates and destroyers), medium (all cruisers, including navy, pirate and tech 2 variants - battlecruiser variants are not allowed) and large (unrestricted access).


The more I think abou tthis the more I don't like it. There is nothing wrong with the current system. I read this as
L1: T1 frigs
L2: Sabres
L3: HACs, Recons, Logi
L4: Nanofag ships

1. After the rebalance T1 frigs are perfectly viable options in current L1 plexes. They are competitive with dessies.

2. Navy faction ships are currently inferior to their T2 counterparts. Their only advantage was their flexibility in getting into smaller plexes. This advantage is gone. IMO, FW should be all about faction navy ships since 1) they are faction navy ships for faction warfare and 2) they are given out at a discount to the LP store.

3. No room for T1 cruisers. T2 AHAC/Logi/Recon will rule the day in L3s.

4. Armor BCs are worthless, only more "open ocean" nanofaggotry. If you are going this way, then please put a warp in on L4s.

.Maybe it's fear of change. What do other FW players think of this change?


I agree. The new changes to plex sizes will kill of CLASSES in FW. No reason for Faction Frigs in L2. No reason for Cruisers and some Faction Cruisers in L3. You can put 3 Logi in's a plex (which rep BS damage) and hold almost infinitely. 2 Vigilant's and 3 Guards could hold against a MUCH LARGER FORCE.

Keep the current plex size restrictions. Add a rookie if you must.


Agreed 100%. Still thinking a bit more on the other changes, but this one at least I¨m pretty clear sucks. It kills t1 cruisers as they just can´t compete with their t2 counterparts. I want to bring new pilots into FW, I want to bring newbies into FW. So now instead of them being in a t1 cruiser and already a huge asset to corp, they´d have to train for a t2 + make the isk for it. Please dont.
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
#398 - 2012-09-02 07:45:01 UTC
Roddex wrote:
Any word on where Tech 3 fit into the planned system (at least the current plan)?



This ^

T3 are cruiser hulls. Will they be allowed into L3 sites?
Martin0
Dorky Unicorns
#399 - 2012-09-02 08:16:40 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

* Capture beacon location: first, we want to move the capture beacon closer to the room entrance (0-10km instead of 60-70km) to promote fights next to the acceleration gate exit point and being able to intercept incoming hostiles more easily.

* Unify capture range: having 10, 20 and 30km range depending on the complex size is confusing and not needed anymore if we move the beacon closer to the room entrance. Thus we would like to have a capture range of 30km for all sized sites, so it's easier to remember for everyone.


I love those two, i can now sit at the warpin with my blastership AND capture the plex :D
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
#400 - 2012-09-02 08:21:57 UTC  |  Edited by: RavenPaine
Also:

X asked, "What do other FW players think?"

These changes are radically different than anything I had imagined.

Major changes create major ripple effects. Clearly the last change affected the economy, the FW specific markets, some individual players, and a couple of massive exploits.

It has also affected the membership base of the Amarr Militia and the Gallente Militia.
The influx of 'farm alts' had a huge impact that cannot be undone. This is the only thing that needed fixed imo.
All the other economic 'incentive based' changes seem like a huge over correction. I can't explain the mechanics...but it just feels wrong. Feels ike FW is about to become the slums of EVE. Just poor pilots sitting in dead Tier 1 systems.

I think the current system is obviously flawed, and I keep going back to the timeless wisdom of:
Why try and re-invent the wheel? The original wheel worked just fine. All 4 factions rolled up the hills and down the hills for years.

Farm alts was a big flat tire, and leaching/awoxing alts was a big leaky tire. Just fix the flat, patch the leak, and let the wheels get rolling again.