These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

SMARTER T3 Rebalances, Please!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2013-06-27 11:24:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
baltec1 wrote:


Given the results so far its a safe bet CCP will not mess this up but you and other like you who don't want to lose their FOTM (speak English) ships are going to be very upset.


Yeah probably to the point where i quit but so what, it's been a long time coming.

You continue to talk as if you know everything but the fact is, CCP have not changed T2 ships yet so your arguments hold no weight. Come back after the HAC and Command ships have been buffed and we'll see if people still think T3's are op in the dps and tank role.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#302 - 2013-06-27 11:26:06 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
I don't think T3 are overpowered, I think Recon ships are underpowered. Except for some niche applications, they have been made redundant by T3.


Also this... Before complaining T3 are OP, do the T2 rebalance first. Maybe they won't be so OP after T2 rebalance.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#303 - 2013-06-27 11:41:43 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


Given the results so far its a safe bet CCP will not mess this up but you and other like you who don't want to lose their FOTM (speak English) ships are going to be very upset.


Yeah probably to the point where i quit but so what, it's been a long time coming.

You continue to talk as if you know everything but the fact is, CCP have not changed T2 ships yet so your arguments hold no weight. Come back after the HAC and Command ships have been buffed and we'll see if people still think T3's are op in the dps and tank role.


CCP have changed the T1 ships. The other cruiser will be balanced in a way as to keep the t1 ships still viable as they have with all the frigates so its a very safe bet that T3 nerfs are going to happen because they must in order to keep them balanced.
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#304 - 2013-06-27 12:02:36 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
Cebraio wrote:
I don't think T3 are overpowered, I think Recon ships are underpowered. Except for some niche applications, they have been made redundant by T3.


Also this... Before complaining T3 are OP, do the T2 rebalance first. Maybe they won't be so OP after T2 rebalance.

Things will certainly be better after T2 rebalance, but it's not going to be enough. T3 simply can't retain all their abilities at the current levels. Sure in some areas they might stay where they are, but something has to go. To think otherwise would presume, that CCP is going to implement massive powercreep in the cruiser class just to avoid nerfing T3 ships. It's pretty obvious to everyone who has kept an eye on the rebalncing, that this isn't going to happen.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#305 - 2013-06-27 12:16:03 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
to the point where i quit

I like this part.

Oh god.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#306 - 2013-06-27 13:20:23 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
but they don't look terrible until T3s get involved.

Being the important part.

Recon ships have a rather high training requirement. For example, I just trained an alt for Tengu and now I wanted to get him into a Falcon. Considering the similarities between those ships, I had expected that I just could put in the Recon ships book and get going. But I actually have to train Electronic Upgrades V first.

I would expect a ship that is highly specialized, and even needs some skills that a T3 doesn't, to excel at its task.

pretty sure falcons excel in their role. Only used gallante recons myself they do things like point n ecm better than any other ship in game. I would love for themto beeven half as solo viable as T3 though but theyre gang ships as usual.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#307 - 2013-06-27 13:44:49 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
value is a consequence of availability versus demand, not the other way around.



This single point is the only truth in a poor economical system, the true economical good system is based on free competition and/or tuning.

How do you justify the cost of your product being worst than your competitor and far more expensive?

How much does it really cost the product and how much are you ready to put on, why would you buy a sub product more expensive than a good one achieving the same purpose for a fraction of the cost?

Vanity.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#308 - 2013-06-27 14:01:58 UTC
Jarod Garamonde wrote:


FALSE.

The fact is that some people pay a premium for a machine that is better than everyone else's. Should Ferrari make slower cars because Honda can't build something just as fast? The answer is NO. And the reason for that answer is "That's why Ferraris cost 150,000 bones, and a Honda S2000 is only 38k, fully loaded."


Oh my lordie, is this Jarod clown really comparing eve-online spaceship balance to real life commuter cars vs super cars?

The idiot level in this thread has now reach an all time high.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#309 - 2013-06-27 14:05:48 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
How do you justify the cost of your product being worst than your competitor and far more expensive?

Availability vs. demand. There is less demand for obsolete products and so their availability declines (meaning people who want it are willing to pay more to get it) while markets for relevant products stay competitive and cheap.

Oh god.
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#310 - 2013-06-27 16:37:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Grimpak
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
value is a consequence of availability versus demand, not the other way around.



This single point is the only truth in a poor economical system, the true economical good system is based on free competition and/or tuning.

How do you justify the cost of your product being worst than your competitor and far more expensive?

How much does it really cost the product and how much are you ready to put on, why would you buy a sub product more expensive than a good one achieving the same purpose for a fraction of the cost?

Vanity.


Don't forget that this is a market where "invention" is a chance to get a blueprint copy of something that was already invented, so the availability of one of the materials is limited aswell.

vanity is also something that can increase the price of something, specially if said something is an imperial geddon or a silver magnate or a fedtron (IE, unique, non-produceable items).


Riot Girl wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
How do you justify the cost of your product being worst than your competitor and far more expensive?

Availability vs. demand. There is less demand for obsolete products and so their availability declines (meaning people who want it are willing to pay more to get it) while markets for relevant products stay competitive and cheap.



riot girl explained it in a much simpler way.




anyways, when will we stop about arguing about something we don't know yet? do we need a lock in this thread or something?

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#311 - 2013-06-27 16:50:11 UTC
Grimpak wrote:





anyways, when will we stop about arguing about something we don't know yet? do we need a lock in this thread or something?


Nah, another will spawn to take its place. Might as well let us have our fun with the panicking mobBig smile
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2013-06-27 16:51:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
anyways, when will we stop about arguing about something we don't know yet? do we need a lock in this thread or something?


Nah, another will spawn to take its place. Might as well let us have our fun with the panicking mobBig smile



yeah, better save on some server-side processingP

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#313 - 2013-06-27 17:30:50 UTC
The good thing about forums and threads is that you don't have to post, share your opinion or argue against others opinions.

Fell free to do whatever you like, that's why this forum exists.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#314 - 2013-06-27 17:32:53 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
The good thing about forums and threads is that you don't have to post, share your opinion or argue against others opinions.

Fell free to do whatever you like, that's why this forum exists.

it sorta loses its purpose after 16 pages of "YIP YIP YIP", "YEP YEP YEP" and "NOP NOP NOP".
at the very least, the comedic value doesn't drop.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#315 - 2013-06-27 17:34:02 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
How do you justify the cost of your product being worst than your competitor and far more expensive?

Availability vs. demand. There is less demand for obsolete products and so their availability declines (meaning people who want it are willing to pay more to get it) while markets for relevant products stay competitive and cheap.


Value = Demand / Supply.

When supply (what you call availability) decreases proportionally to demand, as you indicated in your terrible example, the value will actually not change at all. It remains constant under the conditions you described.

If people want it less AND less are available then the value will be constant.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#316 - 2013-06-27 17:49:15 UTC
Darth Gustav wrote:
as you indicated

Lies.

Oh god.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#317 - 2013-06-28 03:36:18 UTC
Interesting points you all have brought up about supply and demand being the reason for cost, as opposed to cost as a balancing factor. While I'm not exactly sure on how much of a role supply and demand plays, and how much of it is a balancing factor, I stand by my earlier points to rebalance T2 cruisers before rebalancing T3s.
Darth Gustav
Sith Interstellar Tech Harvesting
#318 - 2013-06-28 17:21:34 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
Interesting points you all have brought up about supply and demand being the reason for cost, as opposed to cost as a balancing factor. While I'm not exactly sure on how much of a role supply and demand plays, and how much of it is a balancing factor, I stand by my earlier points to rebalance T2 cruisers before rebalancing T3s.

Supply and demand has, well, everything to do with end prices.

Because it has everything to do with production costs, too.

See, Eve is a free market and its functionality is based on fairly simple market economics.

I agree with you, though, about rebalancing T2 cruisers first, that would seem to be the stronger choice.

He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom
Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#319 - 2013-06-28 20:45:11 UTC
So there was too many whiney posts in the thread. Couldn't catch up reading it.

Did we establish that cost is not a balance? And also that the cost is based on the balance.

In this case a Tech III ship is on the overpowered side of balance. Because of that the ship is highly desirable and because the ship is desirable the demand is high and because demand is high it is very expensive.

So in simplistic terms: its expensive because its good, its not good because its expensive.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#320 - 2013-06-28 21:50:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Riot Girl
Erutpar Ambient wrote:
Did we establish that cost is not a balance?

Edited before the forum ban.

Oh god.