These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Module Rebalancing Part One: RSBs and TEs

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#681 - 2013-03-28 13:05:11 UTC
Johnson Oramara wrote:
Why does Fozzie have such an obsession with nerfing things...

He should know that nerfing is seen as a very negative thing as it means people are losing something. And lately there has been so much nerfing and ruining of good old ships that it's getting ridiculous...

Why not buff other things instead? Just don't do like 30% big changes at once like you do in the nerfing. Make small buffs and see over time how things look like. This way people can keep playing like they were and not feel like they were forcibly ripped off of something they spent huge amounts of training, isk and time while paying you guys real money. New tactics and setups would become viable and competitive with the old ones. Do you understand? you would still have what you worked hard for but it would have just as good alternatives and counters.
That would be a win-win situation in my opinion. Nerf hammer should be the absolutely final and last option.

And what is this favoring towards large alliances as they weren't powerful enough already... It costs ridiculous amount to wardec large alliances while tiny corps are so cheap to dec. And other recent changes and game mechanics seem to favor more and more large blobs.

Does this mean smartbombs and bombs will be nerfed too at some point because zomg! i can actually take on larger fleets with them. Pirate



because on last several years we had passed by a HUGE ammount of buffs and things were already getting out of hand. Thre must be nerfs from time to time to keep things under control, otherwise you need to redesign the whole game.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
amurder Hakomairos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#682 - 2013-03-28 13:05:17 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:


I'm sure calling him stupid and not actually using any real facts, just made up numbers that you pulled out of your ass, will both get him on your side, and stop the nerfs.




my experience is they are gonna do whatever the hell they want anyway. And I didn't call him stupid, the change is stupid.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#683 - 2013-03-28 13:10:06 UTC
amurder Hakomairos wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:


I'm sure calling him stupid and not actually using any real facts, just made up numbers that you pulled out of your ass, will both get him on your side, and stop the nerfs.




my experience is they are gonna do whatever the hell they want anyway. And I didn't call him stupid, the change is stupid.


Oh you didn't?

amurder Hakomairos wrote:

If you are hell bent on nerfing TE for no reason (unless more blobs is a good reason) then can you at least stop the nerf with T2 and leave the faction/officer TE as they are now? That way those of us who spent 6+ months training T2 projectiles, the support skills, and the skills for the ships that use them can at least buy our way out of your stupidity and continue to use these ships as they should be.




Whats that bold underlined bit say?

Because to anybody reading it evidently other than you it reads like you called him stupid.

Which I heard is always the best way to communicate.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Ana Fox
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#684 - 2013-03-28 13:15:00 UTC
amurder Hakomairos wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:


I'm sure calling him stupid and not actually using any real facts, just made up numbers that you pulled out of your ass, will both get him on your side, and stop the nerfs.




my experience is they are gonna do whatever the hell they want anyway. And I didn't call him stupid, the change is stupid.


All changes look stupid when they disturb equilibrium that we made in our head.

Projectile platform was double buffed back then ,so it is time to tone that down.And as it looks now,there is more harm to blasters then projectiles.

It was fun to fly cap free weapons ,to have nice range ,speed and over all to chose ammo dmg types as situation asks.Well you will need to adapt a bit and change tactic so what is big deal.If you play just to have FOTM ships then sorry but game mechanics change from time to time ,sucks you dont like it .
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#685 - 2013-03-28 13:17:22 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
amurder Hakomairos wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:


I'm sure calling him stupid and not actually using any real facts, just made up numbers that you pulled out of your ass, will both get him on your side, and stop the nerfs.




my experience is they are gonna do whatever the hell they want anyway. And I didn't call him stupid, the change is stupid.


Oh you didn't?

amurder Hakomairos wrote:

If you are hell bent on nerfing TE for no reason (unless more blobs is a good reason) then can you at least stop the nerf with T2 and leave the faction/officer TE as they are now? That way those of us who spent 6+ months training T2 projectiles, the support skills, and the skills for the ships that use them can at least buy our way out of your stupidity and continue to use these ships as they should be.




Whats that bold underlined bit say?

Because to anybody reading it evidently other than you it reads like you called him stupid.

Which I heard is always the best way to communicate.


In my opinion you can take it both ways, calling someone stupid or calling the thing he's suggesting stupid. And in my opinion he meant the latter.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#686 - 2013-03-28 13:20:55 UTC
Johnson Oramara wrote:


In my opinion you can take it both ways, calling someone stupid or calling the thing he's suggesting stupid. And in my opinion he meant the latter.


Well then you're both wrong

Quote:
Write your as the possessive form of you, referring to something that a person has, something that belongs to the person in question, or the person you are talking to. "Your" reflects ownership, as in "yours, mine, and ours".

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Mord Raven
Phrike Squadron
#687 - 2013-03-28 13:25:31 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:


As far as the trick being no to die, can you tell me how losing 3kkilometers in fall off from say, a Cane will result in your death? You can stop acting like its 33% of your total range, the final number is so insanely small that theres hardly anything you notice. Even on something like a slicer, it doesn't even bring your damage projection down inside point range.



I don’t know how you fit your slicer but a common fit without TE gives it 22km optimal, and even then it is relatively easy to lure into point range while flying a fast AB frigate. Are you actually arguing that as long as you can project damage outside point range you are okay as a kiter? You do not take into account the room the kiter needs for maneuverability, get pointed and you die. Nerfing TEs will make this room for maneuverability smaller for a lot of ships because you need to move in closer to apply meaningful damage, making something that is already hard harder.
amurder Hakomairos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#688 - 2013-03-28 13:28:27 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
amurder Hakomairos wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:


I'm sure calling him stupid and not actually using any real facts, just made up numbers that you pulled out of your ass, will both get him on your side, and stop the nerfs.




my experience is they are gonna do whatever the hell they want anyway. And I didn't call him stupid, the change is stupid.


Oh you didn't?

amurder Hakomairos wrote:

If you are hell bent on nerfing TE for no reason (unless more blobs is a good reason) then can you at least stop the nerf with T2 and leave the faction/officer TE as they are now? That way those of us who spent 6+ months training T2 projectiles, the support skills, and the skills for the ships that use them can at least buy our way out of your stupidity and continue to use these ships as they should be.




Whats that bold underlined bit say?

Because to anybody reading it evidently other than you it reads like you called him stupid.

Which I heard is always the best way to communicate.


let me rephrase for the grammar police:

that way we can at least buy our way out of the stupidity of the change you are making
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#689 - 2013-03-28 13:31:03 UTC
Mord Raven wrote:

I don’t know how you fit your slicer but a common fit without TE gives it 22km optimal, and even then it is relatively easy to lure into point range while flying a fast AB frigate. Are you actually arguing that as long as you can project damage outside point range you are okay as a kiter? You do not take into account the room the kiter needs for maneuverability, get pointed and you die. Nerfing TEs will make this room for maneuverability smaller for a lot of ships because you need to move in closer to apply meaningful damage, making something that is already hard harder.


Have you even checked the range changes when applied to the standard slicer fits?

It goes from 22km to 20km.

That change sure does ruin....oh...wait....nothing at all.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#690 - 2013-03-28 13:37:00 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Johnson Oramara wrote:


In my opinion you can take it both ways, calling someone stupid or calling the thing he's suggesting stupid. And in my opinion he meant the latter.


Well then you're both wrong

Quote:
Write your as the possessive form of you, referring to something that a person has, something that belongs to the person in question, or the person you are talking to. "Your" reflects ownership, as in "yours, mine, and ours".


Why are you just looking for a way to taunt him and looking for faults? We aren't all perfect in english. He even mentioned that he didn't mean to call anyone stupid, and still you are insisting on that so strongly?
Mord Raven
Phrike Squadron
#691 - 2013-03-28 13:38:30 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Mord Raven wrote:

I don’t know how you fit your slicer but a common fit without TE gives it 22km optimal, and even then it is relatively easy to lure into point range while flying a fast AB frigate. Are you actually arguing that as long as you can project damage outside point range you are okay as a kiter? You do not take into account the room the kiter needs for maneuverability, get pointed and you die. Nerfing TEs will make this room for maneuverability smaller for a lot of ships because you need to move in closer to apply meaningful damage, making something that is already hard harder.


Have you even checked the range changes when applied to the standard slicer fits?

It goes from 22km to 20km.

That change sure does ruin....oh...wait....nothing at all.


As I clearly tried to express the fit is with locus coordinators and not TEs. That was not the point with the post, but you obviously missed it anyway. And yes, hypothetically for a ship that can be caught relatively easy at 22km optimal, a nerf down to 20km would have consequences, wouldn’t it?
Octoven
Stellar Production
#692 - 2013-03-28 13:40:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Octoven
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Got some more Odyssey updates for you all, this time in the form of some module rebalancing! We're going to have a number of module balance changes released with EVE Online: Odyssey on June 4th, and our first batch to announce are the Remote Sensor Boosters and Tracking Enhancers.

Let's start with Remote Sensor Boosters. They give pretty extreme bonuses to scan res at the moment, similar to officer sensor boosters. This has contributed to the growth of instalock camps that are in our opinion are a bit too easy nowadays.
So we're gonna decrease the scan res bonuses so that they give a solid but more reasonable benefit over local boosters. We're leaving the lock range bonus of the T1 and T2 remote boosters the same since we don't see them as overpowered for that role, and actually buffing the lock range bonus from the meta remote boosters since they are currently all giving T1 meta 0 level bonuses for that stat right now.

Key stat for this change is that the best Remote Sensor Boosters will have their Scan Resolution bonus reduced from 40.5% to 33%.

Apologies for the terrible formatting (you can copypaste into a spreadsheet and it looks good)

typeName Old ScanRes Bonus New ScanRes Bonus Old LockRange Bonus New LockRange Bonus
Remote Sensor Booster I 33.8 28 33.8 33.8
Coadjunct Linked Sensor Array I 35.4 29 33.8 35
Linked Sensor Network 40.5 30 33.8 36
Connected Scanning CPU Uplink 37.1 31 33.8 37
F-23 Reciprocal Sensor Cluster Link 38.8 32 33.8 38
Remote Sensor Booster II 40.5 33 40.5 40.5
'Boss' Remote Sensor Booster I 40.5 33 33.8 39
'Entrepreneur' Remote Sensor Booster I 40.5 33 40.5 40.5


Now for TEs. It's a fairly well accepted fact that the great optimal and falloff bonuses on TEs are over the top, especially considering they can get them while also simultaneously giving decent tracking boosts. The strength of TEs has been one of the reasons for Minmatar dominance in recent years, as well as contributing to the relative strength of shield tanking over armor tanking by inflating the value of non-tank low slots. What we're looking at is simply decreasing the falloff and optimal bonuses of all TEs by 1/3, and leaving their tracking bonus intact.

Key stat for this change is a reduction in the Optimal/Falloff bonus on a T2 Tracking Enhancer from 15%/30% to 10%/20%.

Name OldFalloff NewFalloff OldOptimal NewOptimal
Azimuth Descalloping Tracking Enhancer 11 7.4 5.5 3.7
Basic Tracking Enhancer 10 6.6 5 3.3
Beam Parallax Tracking Program 12 8 6 4
Beta-Nought Tracking Mode 10.5 7 5.25 3.5
F-AQ Delay-Line Scan Tracking Subroutines 11.5 7.6 5.75 3.8
Tracking Enhancer I 20 13.4 10 6.7
Sigma-Nought Tracking Mode I 21 14 10.5 7
Auto-Gain Control Tracking Enhancer I 22 14.6 11 7.3
F-aQ Phase Code Tracking Subroutines 23 15.4 11.5 7.7
Fourier Transform Tracking Program 24 16 12 8
Tracking Enhancer II 30 20 15 10
Domination Tracking Enhancer 30 20 15 10
Republic Fleet Tracking Enhancer 30 20 15 10
Mizuro's Modified Tracking Enhancer 31.5 21 15.75 10.5
Hakim's Modified Tracking Enhancer 33 22 16.5 11
Gotan's Modified Tracking Enhancer 34.5 23 17.25 11.5
Tobias' Modified Tracking Enhancer 36 24 18 12

This change will be somewhat painful for many ships that rely on TEs for range in their current fits, but we are confident that the change is necessary to establish balance between the different weapon upgrade modules.

Let me know what you think!


First off I would like to point out that armor tanking has always been preferred over shield in pvp simply because you put your tank in the lows which allows for your mids to use ewar such as webs and scrams. To say that shields are more powerful then armor is BS.

If you would like to continue with this trend then, lets assume they are for a moment. Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't the recent boost to armor supposed to fix this imbalance? Now you are saying TEs are also responsible?? Seriously CCP, you nerf missiles in an attempt to get less people to use them because they create extreme lag with your return to the new graphics system. You boost armor and leave shields where they are, and now you want to proverbially **** Caldari again? Its bad enough to also have lost a titan in RP sense. Sure lets go after minmatar as well.

Why do people fly minmatar over the other races? Ok here is some breakdown of it.

Gallenete Armor tank some shields and uses guns that use a little cap
Caldari shield tanked primarily and uses missiles OR guns not either or
Amarr armor tanked primarily and uses lasers that suck cap making active tanking not feasible.
Minmatar can shield OR armor tank depending on what the player wants to do, does not use cap for guns

The reason Minmatar have dominated the pvp arena is not because of TEs its because they have the most versatile ships of the 4 races which makes them very useful for solo pvp. Stop blaming the modules and start looking at the ships. Minmatar ships do not need to be nerfed, the other 3 need boosted to fall in line.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#693 - 2013-03-28 13:42:27 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Ok. Pay attention people. We have people complaining this is a heavy nerf to Amarr, other saying it will kill blasters, others saying it hits minmatar much more massively. Match this to the whining of heavy missile nerf and.... EVERYONE IS COMPLAINING


That pretty much means its balanced! Everyone is equally unhappy!

Congratulations CCP Fozzie and CCP Rise!

just a question:

how a game developper can hope seeing a bright future for his game by making his whole player base unhappy?


since the last patch, we have seen only 2 things:

NERF NERF NERF
BUGS BUGS BUGS

Eve used to be a great game requiring skills...used to...
Alsyth
#694 - 2013-03-28 13:44:00 UTC
ReSebo nerf welcome.

TE nerf unnecessary.

The only ship that makes TE overpowered is Machariel, that much damage and tracking at that range shouldn't exist. +50% falloff on LARGE AC and too many lowslots for a shield/nanoship is the problem there.

Others are fine, be it tier3 BCs -even AC tornado, few lowslots and no falloff bonus-, HAC snipers (poor things...), frigates/destroyers, AC Vaga/Sleipnir/Cynabal.
amurder Hakomairos
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#695 - 2013-03-28 13:49:08 UTC
Alsyth wrote:
ReSebo nerf welcome.

TE nerf unnecessary.

The only ship that makes TE overpowered is Machariel, that much damage and tracking at that range shouldn't exist. +50% falloff on LARGE AC and too many lowslots for a shield/nanoship is the problem there.

Others are fine, be it tier3 BCs -even AC tornado, few lowslots and no falloff bonus-, HAC snipers (poor things...), frigates/destroyers, AC Vaga/Sleipnir/Cynabal.


Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#696 - 2013-03-28 13:51:37 UTC
Mord Raven wrote:
[
As I clearly tried to express the fit is with locus coordinators and not TEs. That was not the point with the post, but you obviously missed it anyway. And yes, hypothetically for a ship that can be caught relatively easy at 22km optimal, a nerf down to 20km would have consequences, wouldn’t it?


It really doesn't, you'll still DPS out to 22km, it'll just be slightly less DPS. Thats the whole point, people are making this out to be more than it is. The kill will just take 12 seconds instead of 9 seconds (exaggeration intentional).

If you floated at 22km constantly (something thats actually very hard) you can still do exactly that, and you'll still apply DPS to your target, no big deal, again, it will just take you a few more seconds to score your kill but that doesn't matter because you're not actually tanking, you're kiting, so who cares how long it takes, you're in no real danger anyway.

If this thing had forced you into brawling range with the slicer and required a complete rethink on fits then it might be a different story, but most fits honestly won't change at all, in the slightest bit, people will still kite their hearts out, with the added benefit of fights being slightly longer affairs.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
goldiiee
Bureau of Astronomical Anomalies
#697 - 2013-03-28 13:54:34 UTC
amurder Hakomairos wrote:
Alsyth wrote:
ReSebo nerf welcome.

TE nerf unnecessary.

The only ship that makes TE overpowered is Machariel, that much damage and tracking at that range shouldn't exist. +50% falloff on LARGE AC and too many lowslots for a shield/nanoship is the problem there.

Others are fine, be it tier3 BCs -even AC tornado, few lowslots and no falloff bonus-, HAC snipers (poor things...), frigates/destroyers, AC Vaga/Sleipnir/Cynabal.


Its not even OP on the Mach. When a ship's hull costs 6-12x the cost of a normal battleship you should be getting a significant increase in performance.

Even if you don't use the financial cost as a basis for the Mach being OP, (as the prices are player generated 'inflated' anyway) the SP requirement of skilling two races should afford some benefit over a Teir 1 or Navy hull.

Things that keep me up at night;  Why do we use a voice communication device to send telegraphs? Moore's Law should state, Once you have paid off the last PC upgrade you will need another.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#698 - 2013-03-28 13:55:59 UTC
Goldiiee wrote:

Even if you don't use the financial cost as a basis for the Mach being OP, (as the prices are player generated 'inflated' anyway) the SP requirement of skilling two races should afford some benefit over a Teir 1 or Navy hull.


My titan called, CCP left it a note that said price and skill point investment will never have bearing on balance choices.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#699 - 2013-03-28 14:03:54 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Johnson Oramara wrote:
Why does Fozzie have such an obsession with nerfing things...

He should know that nerfing is seen as a very negative thing as it means people are losing something. And lately there has been so much nerfing and ruining of good old ships that it's getting ridiculous...

Why not buff other things instead? Just don't do like 30% big changes at once like you do in the nerfing. Make small buffs and see over time how things look like. This way people can keep playing like they were and not feel like they were forcibly ripped off of something they spent huge amounts of training, isk and time while paying you guys real money. New tactics and setups would become viable and competitive with the old ones. Do you understand? you would still have what you worked hard for but it would have just as good alternatives and counters.
That would be a win-win situation in my opinion. Nerf hammer should be the absolutely final and last option.

And what is this favoring towards large alliances as they weren't powerful enough already... It costs ridiculous amount to wardec large alliances while tiny corps are so cheap to dec. And other recent changes and game mechanics seem to favor more and more large blobs.

Does this mean smartbombs and bombs will be nerfed too at some point because zomg! i can actually take on larger fleets with them. Pirate



because on last several years we had passed by a HUGE ammount of buffs and things were already getting out of hand. Thre must be nerfs from time to time to keep things under control, otherwise you need to redesign the whole game.


Well if they made so many thoughtless buffs they should take responsibility for it rather than make their player base angry with simplest way for them as nerfs.
Leslie Chow
Perkone
Caldari State
#700 - 2013-03-28 14:05:26 UTC
RSB nerf is welcome....

Gonna try and keep this short and sweet cuz so much name calling and crying in this thread its lame.
also not gonna check and see if this was already posted.

Why not nerf tracking bonus from TE and perhaps increase cpu usage.

This way ships that try to dictate range to fight are not penalized for trying to not be scrambled
while being able to able to apply damage only when directly running from or chasing target
and some ships that can just perma kite are penalized by always large radial.

TL;DR

perma mwd ships hurt
not people that actually manage their ship
instead of scram web shoot