These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: No Brakes - Ship and module Balancing in Retribution 1.1

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#81 - 2013-02-14 19:29:20 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Destoya wrote:
Quote:


I kinda draw exception to the idea you won't be improving T2 as much as T1. Many of the T1 ships are now just outright superior to their T2 and faction counterparts.

-Liang


Can you give some examples of this, not including things like the scythe fleet issue and succubus that are in need of a rebalance already?

Keep in mind that T2 isn't supposed to be better in all respects by any means, just more specialized towards some role.

Faction ships on the other hand are supposed to be general purpose ships that are better than their t1 counterpoints, something I agree isn't necessarily the case, most glaringly in the case of the faction versions of the 4 logi cruisers.


The most glaring examples are the Condor to the Crow and Crusader to the Executioner, but the same argument for made for the Firetail/Slasher. Other examples of things that are almost that bad are the Carcal/Navy Osprey/Navy Caracal/Cerb, Moa/Eagle, Thorax/Navy Ex/Deimos, etc.

-Liang

I know what you are saying, but it's a bit early to analyze this as neither the faction nor the T2 varieties have been adjusted yet... although I will agree this is a good time to put a bug or two in Fozzies ear concerning them. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#82 - 2013-02-14 19:29:46 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Although I don't really fly the Incursus a lot any more, I'm sad to see the 10% bonus go. This bonus made the ship worth having a rep on, and now it's basically a waste of a bonus simply because of a new module. Or rather, a regular small armor repairer is not worth fitting. I hope there are plans to properly balance both regular armor repairers and shield boosters. There is now no longer any reason to fit standard shield boosters or armor repairers, just because of new modules.


This is pure hyperbole, especially given the incoming armor boost.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#83 - 2013-02-14 19:31:37 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
I know what you are saying, but it's a bit early to analyze this as neither the faction nor the T2 varieties have been adjusted yet... although I will agree this is a good time to put a bug or two in Fozzies ear concerning them. Smile


Yeah, that's pretty much all I'm doing. I more or less trust him to get the job done in a way that may be the way I would do it but is reasonable and fun.

/shrug

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#84 - 2013-02-14 19:31:48 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
fukier wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
Lili Lu wrote:
Lore Varan wrote:
Slight typo in the title

no drakes - ship and module balancing in retribution 1.1

fixed it for you.

Lol

Oh you're a wit that's for sure.

Notice the current usage stats. The Drake has a long way to fall before anyone should cry about it.



The lack of change to the drake means its still OP and will be the most used bc as a result aswell as HAMS having the same range as torpedoes is plain wrong they need a range nerf..... also when TD's affect missiles might also help balance things a little that and the drake will still obsolete the ferox which is hard to understand how fozzie doesn't understand this....?????


i dunno the lack of dps for non kin damage will hurt the ship for pve thats for sure.

pretty sure the cyclone will be a much better pve ship now.

Well, for PVE most of the time a sustainable and strong tank is more important than firepower.


which is why i am a fan of gist -c type sheild boosters. low cap and good rep amount

have not tried it out yet but pretty sure i will tank any lev iv or annoms in a cyclone now.
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Lili Lu
#85 - 2013-02-14 19:34:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Although I don't really fly the Incursus a lot any more, I'm sad to see the 10% bonus go. This bonus made the ship worth having a rep on, and now it's basically a waste of a bonus simply because of a new module. Or rather, a regular small armor repairer is not worth fitting. I hope there are plans to properly balance both regular armor repairers and shield boosters. There is now no longer any reason to fit standard shield boosters or armor repairers, just because of new modules.


Eccept (at least for those scenarios where active local tanking makes some sense) you will need to keep fitting standard armor rep because unlike the ASBs the AARs are limited to one per ship. So, to make any use of this new armor repper you will still need to have dual reppers (one AAR plus one standard repper). Also the AAR eats cap like any other armor repper so you will need to keep fitting a cap booster. So standard armor reppers will continue to see use.

I agree though that standard shield boosters have been overshadowed because the ASB is so powerful.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#86 - 2013-02-14 19:35:47 UTC
Quote:
which is why i am a fan of gist -c type sheild boosters. low cap and good rep amount

have not tried it out yet but pretty sure i will tank any lev iv or annoms in a cyclone now.


With good skills that is quite possible (we'll have to see), but it will still be far easier to tank the difficult ones in a Drake... especially for less skilled or new pilots on a budget.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#87 - 2013-02-14 19:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Lili Lu wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Although I don't really fly the Incursus a lot any more, I'm sad to see the 10% bonus go. This bonus made the ship worth having a rep on, and now it's basically a waste of a bonus simply because of a new module. Or rather, a regular small armor repairer is not worth fitting. I hope there are plans to properly balance both regular armor repairers and shield boosters. There is now no longer any reason to fit standard shield boosters or armor repairers, just because of new modules.


Eccept (at least for those scenarios where active local tanking makes some sense) you will need to keep fitting standard armor rep because unlike the ASBs the AARs are limited to one per ship. So, to make any use of this new armor repper you will still need to have dual reppers (one AAR plus one standard repper). Also the AAR eats cap like any other armor repper so you will need to keep fitting a cap booster. So standard armor reppers will continue to see use.

I agree though that standard shield boosters have been overshadowed because the ASB is so powerful.

I'm not entirely on board with the ASB assessment (not that it matters of course). Smile

A ship relying on an ASB without a standard shield repper in reserve only has the advantage of knowing exactly how long he has before he dies horribly. Granted, he can use that time to either get the job done, or escape... which is helpful to a degree. But if he does neither before he runs dry he pops like a wet balloon.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Sky Marshal
State War Academy
Caldari State
#88 - 2013-02-14 19:44:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Sky Marshal
fukier wrote:
1.
there is dedicated tackle in pvp fleets so havings ponits and webs is not allways usefull

2.
RR is the big winner for reasons why shield is better

3.
you can fit extenders and rigs and not slow down (sig radius bloom is not big enough to count)

though for small gang or solo then yeah armor has its uses but overall its still not as good.

i am still going to be shield tanking my brutix after this boost.

1. Yes but even on small Caldari ships, it is hard to fit points/web and keep some tank.

2. I have to give you this point.

3. The fact that shield don't slow down the ship was a balancing thing. Armor is more resilient but make you slow and maybe with less damage, shield don't hit your speed but require a big amount of energy for active tanking and give trouble with the fitting. This armor boost will destroy this balance.

Dersen Lowery wrote:
Like the fact that, as a rule, Caldari ships have about as many mids left over after prop and tank as Amarr ships do, and with at least as many low slots to dedicate to damage mods and the ability to fit maximum size guns?

Do you realize that to kill someone, it is better than you make him unable to flee ? shield are med slot only, so you can choose between damage or tank while I have to choose between electronic or tank. Sometimes, I would be happy to sacrifice damage for anything else.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#89 - 2013-02-14 19:46:16 UTC
The AAR can be run without charges. It would be nice to be able to toggle WHEN you choose you use your 8 burst reps. As it stands right now, if you run it you use it.

The Myrm comes out of the change very underwhelming. You've lost 125 PG so that triple rep setup isn't as easy to fit as it used to be. On top of that - the Prophecy with it's resist bonus can work in a fleet AND run it's own effective triple rep setup. Lastly, the Brutix and Myrm still share the rep bonus and that feels deeply unsatisfying. The Myrm has many more choices to add flavor. Hybrid damage or Hybrid tracking would be boring but effective. Drone tracking or MWD speed would make a very interesting drone boat.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#90 - 2013-02-14 19:50:52 UTC
You know, in this same vein I'd rather like it if they explored the possibility of having cap batteries work a bit differently.

Perhaps have the amount of cap in your battery be linked to a particular module (with the battery having its own pool of cap, peak recharge rate point, and perhaps some other traits peculiar to them) independent of your normal cap reserve.

They could be (as now sort of) less vulnerable to nos/neuts, have either a higher or lower recharge rate than your ships normal cap depending on the quality of the battery you use, and would be handled completely seperately from your main cap reseerve. They could even perhaps have a very nice synergy happen with cap boosters, perhaps only kicking in when the booster is on a reload cycle.

Just a thought, sorry for the slight derail.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Mund Richard
#91 - 2013-02-14 20:03:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
fukier wrote:
i dunno the lack of dps for non kin damage will hurt the ship for pve thats for sure.

pretty sure the cyclone will be a much better pve ship now.

Unless you shoot at drones/Amarr(and associated non-EoM rats), you will be doing more dps before the change (assuming you have the skills you should have), and also compared to the new cyclone.

Amarr were already a bad pairing (EM hole on shields), and drone missions are random, so I don't quite see a problem.
Specially not on it's home turf (where each race tends to do best).

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Mund Richard
#92 - 2013-02-14 20:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Sky Marshal wrote:
3. The fact that shield don't slow down the ship was a balancing thing. Armor is more resilient but make you slow and maybe with less damage, shield don't hit your speed but require a big amount of energy for active tanking and give trouble with the fitting. This armor boost will destroy this balance.

"Give trouble with the fitting"
Fitting mods are lowslot, so easier to use on shield ships.
Armor tends to fit multiple repair modules to stay competitive, as they cannot oversize.
Suddenly even 6 lows can be consumed by the tank, leaving none for TE/Gank, and even the mids are compromised (cap booster).
Also, you need the rigs for tanking as well, and Neutrons were usually just a dream even before active rigs affected PG.
(Though I do see how the Ferox is hurt quite a bit by not having the Drake's slot layout.
On the other hand shield Brutixes/Canes were popular even though it had only 4 mids.)

I don't expect any balance being broken on BC level, except how maybe lightly-tanked armor BCs might be able to chase after lightly tanked shield kiters more efficiently.
Assuming the kiter is not minmatar.
Nor using any nanofiber.
Nop, not much changing in terms of balance.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Arec Bardwin
#93 - 2013-02-14 21:04:30 UTC
No mention of changes (removal of passive resists, improved by the compensation skills) to active shield and armor hardeners?
Mund Richard
#94 - 2013-02-14 21:12:42 UTC
Arec Bardwin wrote:
No mention of changes (removal of passive resists, improved by the compensation skills) to active shield and armor hardeners?

Good catch.
Suppose it will be in the patch notes.
...
But you must admit, it doesn't sound like something the PR guys would want as part of a Dev Blog to "sell" the point release, even if it does make sense.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#95 - 2013-02-14 21:20:58 UTC
This balancing blog has already been out a few hours and only 5 pages of comments.

Fozzie, people are starting to take your skills, effort, and loving attention to your work for granted.

This makes it somewhat strangely appropriate that this is coming out on Valentines Day. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#96 - 2013-02-14 21:42:38 UTC
I dont like how they are making armor and shield more and more similar.

Ancillary armor repair? ASB was already a terrible module, why make an armor version of it too?

Instead of adding STUPID new modules try balancing the ones that we already have.
Endeavour Starfleet
#97 - 2013-02-14 21:49:32 UTC
Reducing ways of newer players to make funds with the Drake tank nerf..

Massively boosting AFK Cloaking with Black Ops changes..

Modular POS put on the backburner.

Ya thanks Roll
MissNic
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2013-02-14 22:15:39 UTC
Beware the cloaky brick tank Proteus with the covert cyno Twisted
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#99 - 2013-02-14 22:20:37 UTC
Have you considered using a different naming convention for the new armor reps, considering they function differently compared to the ASB's? I'm thinking the word 'ancillary' in both modules implies they are basically the same, when they have a couple of really important differences.
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#100 - 2013-02-14 23:12:12 UTC
I am looking forward to the day when Interceptors are buffed/adjusted a little, like a little more lock range, perhaps some extra pg on some of them... and also make warp velocity (AU/s) matter more, as in acceleration faster within warp... :)

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934