These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

CCP Rozzie balancing strategy
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-08-03 23:35:45 UTC
Command ship changes are terribad.

HAC changes have like 60 pages of good suggestions that the Devs won't even recognize. Either didn't read or just ignored.
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
#22 - 2013-08-03 23:37:52 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
Command ship changes are terribad.

HAC changes have like 60 pages of good suggestions that the Devs won't even recognize. Either didn't read or just ignored.

And how many HACs have you built in preparation?

CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2013-08-04 05:03:05 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
Command ship changes are terribad.

HAC changes have like 60 pages of good suggestions that the Devs won't even recognize. Either didn't read or just ignored.

When most of these "good ideas" are along the line of giving these ships t3 like firepower speed and tank is it any wonder CCP dont pay any attention?

People who are trying to get HACs buffed to the point where they totaly invalidate t1 cruisers are rightly ignored.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#24 - 2013-08-04 05:45:29 UTC
PvE people who care about Tengu nerfs can just fly a Cerberus now.

Oh god.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#25 - 2013-08-04 05:58:42 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:
Command ship changes are terribad.

HAC changes have like 60 pages of good suggestions that the Devs won't even recognize. Either didn't read or just ignored.

When most of these "good ideas" are along the line of giving these ships t3 like firepower speed and tank is it any wonder CCP dont pay any attention?

People who are trying to get HACs buffed to the point where they totaly invalidate t1 cruisers are rightly ignored.

Well, it is part of the metagame...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#26 - 2013-08-04 06:11:34 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:

Well, it is part of the metagame...


And I for one, will defend the rights of our newbees to fly cheap ships that make our enemies rage to their false gods and weep tears of rage. I welcome this new age of balance with open arms.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2013-08-04 11:50:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:
Command ship changes are terribad.

HAC changes have like 60 pages of good suggestions that the Devs won't even recognize. Either didn't read or just ignored.

When most of these "good ideas" are along the line of giving these ships t3 like firepower speed and tank is it any wonder CCP dont pay any attention?

People who are trying to get HACs buffed to the point where they totaly invalidate t1 cruisers are rightly ignored.


No it isn't.

People asking for a high slot moved to low or a minmatar HAC to use missiles as its weapon system isn't anything like you described. The least they could do is recognize the constructive ideas so people know they aren't being ignored.
Donbe Scurred
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-08-08 21:31:12 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Donbe Scurred wrote:
Luc Chastot wrote:
Lately I've been getting this feeling they just come up with anything, post it and let the playerbase rage and come up with the proper balance changes.

If you haven't read the changes coming with Odyssey 1.1, go check F&I and give your feedback.


Looks good to me what exactly are you complaining about? The fact that they present their ideas, take feedback and tweak the changes after considering the feedback.

Can you think of a better way? If so present it or STFU.


Like whenever they took our feedback on the Domi and now its OP as ****? Oh wait, they didn't. Great job.


Happy Now?
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#29 - 2013-08-08 22:04:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
When most of these "good ideas" are along the line of giving these ships t3 like firepower speed and tank is it any wonder CCP dont pay any attention?


Last I checked, T2's are supposed to exceed T3's in their specialized roles. You could argue a T3 nerf is in the works, but I'm not sure where HACs are supposed to excel if not in firepower, speed, tank.... or evidently utility highs.

Quote:
People who are trying to get HACs buffed to the point where they totaly invalidate t1 cruisers are rightly ignored.


They didn't do so before the T1 buff; I'm not sure why they'd be in danger of doing so now. That being said, I think the pre-change Ishtar is fine power-level wise; it'd be nice if everything was buffed into that range (doesn't look to be the case).
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#30 - 2013-08-09 03:59:37 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
S Byerley wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
When most of these "good ideas" are along the line of giving these ships t3 like firepower speed and tank is it any wonder CCP dont pay any attention?


Last I checked, T2's are supposed to exceed T3's in their specialized roles. You could argue a T3 nerf is in the works, but I'm not sure where HACs are supposed to excel if not in firepower, speed, tank.... or evidently utility highs.

Quote:
People who are trying to get HACs buffed to the point where they totaly invalidate t1 cruisers are rightly ignored.


They didn't do so before the T1 buff; I'm not sure why they'd be in danger of doing so now. That being said, I think the pre-change Ishtar is fine power-level wise; it'd be nice if everything was buffed into that range (doesn't look to be the case).


HACs are not ment to be better in every way to T1 and its very clear that T3s are in for a much needed nerf. The pair of you are by far the biggest complainers in the f&I thread and you are demanding things like 720s with 2x large extenders on vagabonds. No. You cannot have the best of all worlds. You have repeatedly been shown that what you demand would be inbalanced.
bloodknight2
Revenu.Quebec
#31 - 2013-08-09 05:31:48 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:
Nerf T3.


and add a fourth med slot to the absolution Pirate
William Walker
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#32 - 2013-08-09 06:18:39 UTC
What about Amarrian industrial love? What about them? No, it's aaaalll about the Iterons.

ヽ(⌒∇⌒)ﾉ へ(゜∇、°)へ (◕‿◕✿)
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
#33 - 2013-08-09 18:54:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
HACs are not ment to be better in every way to T1


In what ways do you want T1's to be better/identical? CCP would be pretty remiss not to give people something for the 15x pricetag and SP requirements. (not that they aren't, my complaint is balance within the ship class)

Quote:
The pair of you are by far the biggest complainers in the f&I thread and you are demanding things like 720s with 2x large extenders on vagabonds. No. You cannot have the best of all worlds. You have repeatedly been shown that what you demand would be inbalanced.


Lol? Stop being silly. I made all of one post in the F&I thread lamenting the impact of lost utility highs on exploration. It strikes me as a reasonable thing to point out given that ninja plexing is still pretty obscure and the only pve use for HACs that I can think of. In any case, I suspect you're thinking of someone else.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-08-09 18:59:43 UTC
My last gank was in low sec.

Popped out of a hole in some lonetreck low system, saw a T1 cruiser on scan and went all "suddenly loki" on him.

Dude was like "Whoa what just happened"

Looked at the KM (no T2 ) looked at the three week old toon....paid the dude for the ship.

Nine mil is nothing for me, its a lot for a dude that is trying to rat in lowsec in a maller.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#35 - 2013-08-09 19:08:07 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
Lately I've been getting this feeling they just come up with anything, post it and let the playerbase rage and come up with the proper balance changes.

If you haven't read the changes coming with Odyssey 1.1, go check F&I and give your feedback.


Players not raging to any proposed change in MMO's?

Do tell us about this fantasy land that you've seen.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#36 - 2013-08-09 19:16:14 UTC
Luc Chastot wrote:
Lately I've been getting this feeling they just come up with anything, post it and let the playerbase rage and come up with the proper balance changes.

If you haven't read the changes coming with Odyssey 1.1, go check F&I and give your feedback.


Has anyone ever told you that your portrait looks a lot like Dinnsdale Pirrannnahha's?

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Fal Dara
Vortex Command Corporation
#37 - 2013-08-09 19:17:12 UTC
i think the command ships nerfs are just aweful.

astarte and ALL the others down to 5 main-weapons hardpoints? that's LESS than their t1 counterparts.

adding MISSILES to an astarte? seriously? that's the single most useless thing ever concieved on a gallente command ship.

just give it 6 guns.

... Eos is 'ok' .. but it's a bit scatterbrained. just man up and give it the 300 drone bay.

... personally, i would rather reprocess my astarte than fly the hunk of CRAP that they're nerfing it into.

fewer turrets than cruisers?! really.
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#38 - 2013-08-09 19:31:41 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:
i think the command ships nerfs are just aweful.
fewer turrets than cruisers?! really.

L2Math turrets Roll

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#39 - 2013-08-09 19:38:28 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:


fewer turrets than cruisers?! really.


Remind me how many turrets a kronos has.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#40 - 2013-08-09 19:49:37 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:
i think the command ships nerfs are just aweful.

astarte and ALL the others down to 5 main-weapons hardpoints? that's LESS than their t1 counterparts.

adding MISSILES to an astarte? seriously? that's the single most useless thing ever concieved on a gallente command ship.

just give it 6 guns.

... Eos is 'ok' .. but it's a bit scatterbrained. just man up and give it the 300 drone bay.

... personally, i would rather reprocess my astarte than fly the hunk of CRAP that they're nerfing it into.

fewer turrets than cruisers?! really.
The Astarte in it's current buff, is actually better than the TQ version. He's using a new metric called effective turrets. TQ current is 10.9, new buff is 11. So if you did fit missiles, it's even more DPS.

The Eos on the other hand is still lacklustre. Removing a slot instead of moving it, hasn't helped it much either. But we'll see.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Previous page12