These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Back to the balancing future!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#81 - 2012-11-06 16:02:44 UTC
Interesting ideas. When you rebalance CS and leadership mechanics/offgrid boosting, will you be adjusting the way mindlinks interact with leadership skills? As it stands, mindlinks more or less double the strength of the corresponding ganglinks, making it much more important to have the mindlink plugged in than it is to max out the Command Ships skill or the appropriate T3 subsystem. Are there any plans to shift the emphasis such that mindlinks become less of a must-have for pilots with leadership skills?

Also, will T1 BCs retain the ability to fit gang links, or will fleet boosting become a CS/T3-only affair?
Iris Bravemount
Golden Grinding Gears
#82 - 2012-11-06 16:03:56 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Iris Bravemount wrote:
Very good news overall, but it sounds like you guys don't want to tiericide the larger hulls. The devblog doesn't mention giving all 'combat' Battleships and all 'attack' Battleships the same amount of slots and roughly the same fitting stats.


The same tiericide principles apply all the way to BS, the blog was talking about roles primarily.


Thanks for clarifying this. Starting tier 1 BC and BS hamstering now.Blink

"I will not hesitate when the test of Faith finds me, for only the strongest conviction will open the gates of paradise. My Faith in you is absolute; my sword is Yours, My God, and Your will guides me now and for all eternity." - Paladin's Creed
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#83 - 2012-11-06 16:04:03 UTC
corestwo wrote:
Fozzie: Care to comment on the implications that this devblog makes that you guys will be adding four entirely new battleships (3 disruption and an attack?) Smile


Maybe someday, but we have much more pressing balance issues to deal with so we're not going to commit to anything in that regard.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#84 - 2012-11-06 16:06:06 UTC
Iniquita wrote:
I think its worth remember that there is a fifth leadership type in eve. Have you taken into consideration how a nerf to off grid boosting would affect mining in eve?


Yup it's something we're putting a lot of thought into. Moving links ongrid has significant technical blockers at the moment so it's not coming anytime soon, and between now and that bright sunny someday we'll spend a lot of time consulting with miners to make sure gameplay stays interesting and useful.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#85 - 2012-11-06 16:07:11 UTC
on the command ships/T3

I sincerely hope the links will end up with a AOE range limit maybe with skills/T2 modules increasing the range and cap use maybe.
I would start with 20km range as basic to encourage them to be in LP range so there is genuine danger to them rather than being able to sit at 150km out of range of most things as that would kind of defeat the off grid boosting change and stop T3 alts boosting away in relative safety semi afk.
Also liking the claymore changing to HAMS i assume.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Dorian Wylde
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#86 - 2012-11-06 16:07:25 UTC
RIP Typhoon. You were my favorite ship, you will be missed.

Everything looks great, though I hope the battleships are getting a better balancing pass than what the blog says. 90% seemed to be "this ship is fine". Even if you aren't changing the roles I hope the HP and slot layouts will be equalized, along with the mineral costs you mentioned.

Also, roleplayer gripe: you're making the Megathron the blaster platform, which is the Hyp's job according to the Info panels. Will need to adjust those.

Love the proposed command ship changes, especially the T3. Is it possible Information links will get looked at during their review? If you give Gallente armor links as planned, I can't see much use for them. I've always though they should be changed to combat support stats. Not straight up damage, but tracking speed, explosion radius, drone speed/tracking, things like that.
Sinooko
Tharumec
Gespenster Kompanie
#87 - 2012-11-06 16:07:28 UTC
Give the Maelstrom comparable locking range to the Rokh.

Also strip shield booster bonus from battleships. Local reps are completely useless in blobs.
mkint
#88 - 2012-11-06 16:08:55 UTC  |  Edited by: mkint
balancing does not fix what is broken.

Trying to balance around broken results in even more broken.

a polished turd is still a turd.

-edit: looks like you're trying to remove Gallente's non-drone entry level mission boat. Drones suck. And are getting the nerf in PVE as well. Is Gallente missioning that overpowered, to deserve 2 subsequent nerfs?

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Katrina Bekers
A Blessed Bean
Pandemic Horde
#89 - 2012-11-06 16:10:36 UTC
Typo:

"Here is a picture summarizing the text below as a tl;dr version:"

Should be "above".
____

On the matter: please pretty please with whipped cream on top, do something for the Gallente blasterboats. If you give me a face-melting weapon and no way to be (and survive at least a bit) at face distance, the weapon is useless. Active armor tank and in-your-face don't mix.

There's a reason why most nullsec blocks use generously Abaddons, Apocalypses, Scorpions, Rokhs, Tempests and Maelstroms.

I can't wait to see the day when Megathrons and (bwahaha) Hyperions are even CONSIDERED in fleet doctrines...

<< THE RABBLE BRIGADE >>
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#90 - 2012-11-06 16:11:28 UTC
Sinooko wrote:
Give the Maelstrom comparable locking range to the Rokh.

Also strip shield booster bonus from battleships. Local reps are completely useless in blobs.


who said every BS should be usefull in blobs ?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#91 - 2012-11-06 16:11:41 UTC
Tsubutai wrote:
Interesting ideas. When you rebalance CS and leadership mechanics/offgrid boosting, will you be adjusting the way mindlinks interact with leadership skills? As it stands, mindlinks more or less double the strength of the corresponding ganglinks, making it much more important to have the mindlink plugged in than it is to max out the Command Ships skill or the appropriate T3 subsystem. Are there any plans to shift the emphasis such that mindlinks become less of a must-have for pilots with leadership skills?

Also, will T1 BCs retain the ability to fit gang links, or will fleet boosting become a CS/T3-only affair?


Shifting parts of the bonuses from the ganglinks to the other skills and bonuses is an option we have been considering but we have not made a decision there yet. It's likely that the gang link stuff will not all show up in one patch.

And we have no plans to remove the gang link cpu reduction bonus from the Combat Battlecruisers (formerly known as tier 1 and 2).

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Dinta Zembo
Tea. Earl Grey. Cold.
#92 - 2012-11-06 16:12:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Dinta Zembo
So if I have battlecruisers 5 and each racial cruiser at lvl 3, does that mean I'll get every racial battlecruiser skill to 5?
You're saying 'if you can fly it now you'll still be able to fly it', but I'd like to know on what level. I suppose the answer is yes when I read that it's recommended to train bc and dessies for the maximum effect, but just checking.
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#93 - 2012-11-06 16:12:34 UTC
Quote:
How the flying fXXk can this 'faster specialization'?


They're removing the need for lower-class skills to IV or V, and this is assuming racial battlecruisers remains the same rank as it does now. Right now, training for a T2 battlecruiser requires: Racial Frigate V, Assault Ships IV, Racial Cruiser V, Heavy Assault Ships IV, Battlecruiser V, Command Ships I (and a slew of support skills, but those prereqs aren't changing).

Afterward: Racial Frigate IV, Racial Cruiser IV, Racial Battlecruiser V, Command Ships I. Cutting out Frigate V, Cruiser V, AS IV, and HAS IV will save you ~30 days of training (actually, I think that's lowballing a little).
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#94 - 2012-11-06 16:13:26 UTC
Typhoon

Surely the raven should be more mobile as it's role will be to keep range so the phoon should be slower armour tanking still i hope it won't be changed to shields.
its most useful in RR arm bs fleet as caldari don't have armour ships this is rather useful for missile pilots to be useful in armour tanking fleet please don't change this or you will be reducing its role effectively.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Alara IonStorm
#95 - 2012-11-06 16:13:34 UTC
Sinooko wrote:
Give the Maelstrom comparable locking range to the Rokh.

Also strip shield booster bonus from battleships. Local reps are completely useless in blobs.

I think they could do the best of both worlds make one the Shield Boost and the other the Artillery Ship.

Maybe tracking, or Falloff on the Tempest, Dmg Bonus and 7 Turrets / 6 Mids 5 Lows. Or give the Shield Boost to the Tempest and make the Mael all Fleet.
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#96 - 2012-11-06 16:14:20 UTC
Dinta Zembo wrote:
So if I have battlecruisers 5 and each racial cruiser at lvl 3, does that mean I'll get every racial battlecruiser skill to 5?
You're saying 'if you can fly it now you'll still be able to fly it', but I'd like to know on what level.

Has been answered a couple of posts earlier: You'll get each racial BC 5.
DeltaPhalanx
Hordes Of Belial
#97 - 2012-11-06 16:14:48 UTC
Will the changes to Gang Link bonuses be made "Role Bonues" or will the second gang link bonus supplant the existing second bonus for the Command Ships skill? Ie, would the Vulture's second Hybrid Optimal Range bonus become the 3% to Info War link bonus?

To clarify, each command ship has four bonuses based on Command Ships skill level; will the bonuses to links become native to the hull, plus having four bonuses, or will we have two bonuses and two gang link bonuses?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#98 - 2012-11-06 16:15:09 UTC
Dinta Zembo wrote:
So if I have battlecruisers 5 and each racial cruiser at lvl 3, does that mean I'll get every racial battlecruiser skill to 5?
You're saying 'if you can fly it now you'll still be able to fly it', but I'd like to know on what level.


To the same level. So yes in that case you'd get all four skills to level 5.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#99 - 2012-11-06 16:15:46 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Sinooko wrote:
Give the Maelstrom comparable locking range to the Rokh.

Also strip shield booster bonus from battleships. Local reps are completely useless in blobs.

I think they could do the best of both worlds make one the Shield Boost and the other the Artillery Ship.

Maybe tracking, or Falloff on the Tempest, Dmg Bonus and 7 Turrets / 6 Mids 5 Lows. Or give the Shield Boost to the Tempest and make the Mael all Fleet.


Perhaps make the tempest a larger stabber instead of its heavy ruppy style.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Zagdul
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2012-11-06 16:16:30 UTC
Hi Fozzie!

On the harbi, the issues I've had with it are CPU and CAP. Not necessarily slot layout or modules. Fill that ship with lasers and you cap out pretty quickly and don't have room for much. Other BC's do this without an issue.

Furthermore, if you want to fix the brutix, prophecy and harbi in one quick stroke, adjust the mass penalty for armor tanking. Potentially the rig drawbacks would solve the issue.

Ferox as a sniper? I always viewed the Ferox as a close range brawler. I believe there are other ships in the caldari line who would make better snipers and need more love than the Ferox (eagle/cerberus) The only reason it's not used is that the drake currently is much more powerful.Not to mention that the T3 battlecruisers will always out perform their siblings as snipers.

Lastly, please pause the fixes to HML's. If you fix the rest of the battlecruisers, you will open the potential for HML's platform ships to become completely obsolete.


Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement