These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

CSM7 Dec Summit Topic - Ship Balancing

First post First post
Author
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#41 - 2012-12-10 01:01:26 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
While you are balancing the ships, can you take a look at the warp speed and do something more interesting with it?

Maybe mix it up a bit more between different ships, and expand the range between the slowest and the fastest?

Or, perhaps, since Minmatar typically have the fastest ship speeds, give the Amarr much faster warp speeds. The Amarr are supposed to have better tech, anyways. So, figure that they should be able to cross 10 systems in the same time it takes the Minmatar to cross 5 systems. The Gallente and Caldari can fall somewhere inbetween.


Warp speed itself is almost entirely irrelevant.

What would make a big difference is warp acceleration and deceleration rates.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#42 - 2012-12-10 01:45:03 UTC
SMT008 wrote:
As an exemple, a Cerberus should be like a super-Caracal. A bit more range, a bit more DPS (like an additional launcher or something), T2 resistances, no fitting issues (Like the current Caracal) and the Caracal's speed.

That would be a good post-Retribution Cerberus.

Half of the point of the frigate and cruiser rebalance was to narrow the gap between T1 and T2 hulls so that T1s are actually worth flying. There's little point doing that if next they're just going to buff the hell out of HACs to restore the old gap.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Psihius
Perkone
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-12-10 12:38:33 UTC
As it was said - when to expect changes to Faction and Pirate frigates and cruisers? :)
Some road map on battlecruisers, battleships and T2 ships would be good.

Also some initial info about the cap ship re-balancing would be appreciated (not the super capitals, but maybe those too)
Noisrevbus
#44 - 2012-12-10 16:02:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
While you are balancing the ships, can you take a look at the warp speed and do something more interesting with it?

Maybe mix it up a bit more between different ships, and expand the range between the slowest and the fastest?

Or, perhaps, since Minmatar typically have the fastest ship speeds, give the Amarr much faster warp speeds. The Amarr are supposed to have better tech, anyways. So, figure that they should be able to cross 10 systems in the same time it takes the Minmatar to cross 5 systems. The Gallente and Caldari can fall somewhere inbetween.


Warp speed itself is almost entirely irrelevant.

What would make a big difference is warp acceleration and deceleration rates.


This is getting a bit too detailed now and perhaps sliding a bit offtopic with that, but...

I've always enjoyed the warp-speed dynamics and that it's not tied to acceleration and deceleration (regardless wether that feature is performance-based or not, where discussing it could be moot).

It made stretching and splitting pursuers (or chasing runaways) more difficult in smaller systems, which made the choices you took with regard to routes more important and gave a variety over systems (eg., "this is a dangerous system, here we can be overrun" or "this is an ideal system for closing the gap" etc.).

If the mechanics rested upon the acceleration rates as some sort of "double alignment" factor you would lose those dynamics and get a much more predictable timing on various ships and gangs. Too streamlined for my taste.

I also provides differentiation between ships that align well and ships that warp well. A notable example (while CCP seem to be out to wash away racial traits on the whole) would be considering Caldari as a race with alignment as a racial trait and how that affect larger hulls with slower warp-speeds; ships that could align fast to escape grids but not warp fast enough to shake pursuers or catch smaller hulls when spanning multiple systems. That "goddamn Caldari hull a weightclass above that would always align as fast as you did off the gate, but whome you could always catch in warp to give you further chances to catch him on the next gate, and the next...". It is (or was) part of the traits, balance, and the charm. It was especially pronounced and interesting in the first few patches following the nano-nerf when alignment-speed was still a bit overblown. It was... an interesting environment.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#45 - 2012-12-12 09:22:45 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
SMT008 wrote:
As an exemple, a Cerberus should be like a super-Caracal. A bit more range, a bit more DPS (like an additional launcher or something), T2 resistances, no fitting issues (Like the current Caracal) and the Caracal's speed.

That would be a good post-Retribution Cerberus.

Half of the point of the frigate and cruiser rebalance was to narrow the gap between T1 and T2 hulls so that T1s are actually worth flying. There's little point doing that if next they're just going to buff the hell out of HACs to restore the old gap.


I'm not trying to "buff the hell out of HACs", I'm just trying to bring the Cerberus to the Caracals' level (Especially on speed and fitting room). This alone will make it okay to fly.

Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-12-12 10:27:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Scatim Helicon
SMT008 wrote:
Scatim Helicon wrote:
SMT008 wrote:
As an exemple, a Cerberus should be like a super-Caracal. A bit more range, a bit more DPS (like an additional launcher or something), T2 resistances, no fitting issues (Like the current Caracal) and the Caracal's speed.

That would be a good post-Retribution Cerberus.

Half of the point of the frigate and cruiser rebalance was to narrow the gap between T1 and T2 hulls so that T1s are actually worth flying. There's little point doing that if next they're just going to buff the hell out of HACs to restore the old gap.


I'm not trying to "buff the hell out of HACs", I'm just trying to bring the Cerberus to the Caracals' level (Especially on speed and fitting room). This alone will make it okay to fly.


The Cerberus obviously needs some tweaking just to bring it in line with the other HACs. But not turning it into what you called a 'super-Caracal', that would invalidate the point of the Caracal being improved in the first place. Following the design philosophy that T2 is more specialised than T1, not outright superior across the board, the new Cerberus will outperform the Caracal in one specific aspect and be broadly equal or maybe even slightly inferior in the others, as will the rest of the T2 range relative to its T1 hull type.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#47 - 2012-12-12 11:48:45 UTC
The Cerb is a particularly sad case; the only ship that's worse off is the poor Eagle.

For my money, I'd repurpose the Eagle away from it's sniping (actually "paintscratching at 200km") role, where it will always be totally outclassed by the Naga and make it into a Caldari version of the Vagabond.

The Cerb... was already marginal at best in it's "ultra-long long range delayed damage" role, a role that has been virtually eliminated by very fast on-grid probing. It was a great frigate/anti-support killer, but now the Caracal does that job super well. All the Cerb can really do is have better tank & resists so that it can be a more survivable but more expensive ship that does the same job in bigger fleets with a better chance of surviving.

One possibility might be to increase its sensor strength by a lot (and I mean a really lot, to ~100 or so), and its targeting range by ~50% or so, to give it a specialist anti-EW ship role. Maybe give it a FoF missile role bonus as well? As a side effect of the sensor strength boost, it would also be harder to probe out, meaning it could actually leverage its range advantage in the face of probing.

Also for the love of christ, increase its fittings and base cap a bit.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2012-12-12 14:13:56 UTC
The last update ruined missile legion.... it need to be reviewed...
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#49 - 2012-12-12 21:33:14 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
The last update ruined missile legion.... it need to be reviewed...

Ruining missile Legions just brings them back into line with the pre-ruined laser Legion option!

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Previous page123