These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Stop 'rebalencing' ships and create some real content
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mors Magne
Terra Incognita
#1 - 2013-09-17 21:13:44 UTC
Rebalancing ships can lead to a bad press in the media:

Brendan Drain's news article for Massively


I'm cynical of 'rebalancing' - it's a cheap way of giving the appearance of improving the game on a tight budget.

I think CCP should go back to their old strategy of producing real content (like T3 ships and wormholes) rather than fiddle around with ship stats.

Breaking ships like the Vagabond is 'change', but it's not real improvement.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#2 - 2013-09-17 21:20:21 UTC
I get the distinct impression that you don't really know WTF you are talking about.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#3 - 2013-09-17 21:24:44 UTC
Game needs a good balance of both.

Problem is tho there is genuinely some legacy stuff that needs tweaking/rebalancing that really needs to be done before too much effort is spent on purely new content.
Mors Magne
Terra Incognita
#4 - 2013-09-17 21:38:54 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
I get the distinct impression that you don't really know WTF you are talking about.




If the rebalancing is being done cheaply by 1 person working for a few hours, it might be worth it. This is because changing things a bit might keep things interesting for some people.


If the rebalancing is costing a lot of money, then it's not worth the bad press it's getting.
Mors Magne
Terra Incognita
#5 - 2013-09-17 21:56:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mors Magne
Rroff wrote:
Game needs a good balance of both.

Problem is tho there is genuinely some legacy stuff that needs tweaking/rebalancing that really needs to be done before too much effort is spent on purely new content.



It will never be possible to balance Eve Online in the perfect way you think is possible. This is because:

1) Eve is a game with too many variables to balance perfectly. E.g. Chess is as closely balanced as it's possible to get, but the odds still favour white.

2) A perfectly balanced game would probably get boring very fast.
James Akachi
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-09-17 22:04:53 UTC
Mors Magne wrote:
Rroff wrote:
Game needs a good balance of both.

Problem is tho there is genuinely some legacy stuff that needs tweaking/rebalancing that really needs to be done before too much effort is spent on purely new content.



It will never be possible to balance Eve Online in the perfect way you think is possible. This is because:

1) Eve is a game with too many variables to balance perfectly. E.g. Chess is as closely balanced as it's possible to get, but the odds still favour white.

2) A perfectly balanced game would probably get boring very fast.

Nobody said it needs to be perfectly balanced. No MMO can be perfectly balanced unless every class is identical, but some effort in balancing is better than none in all cases.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#7 - 2013-09-17 22:11:31 UTC
Why add new ships when there are still dozens of useless ships.

Make broken ships useful, then we can add new ships to fill roles that are empty.

TLDR, disagree with OP

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#8 - 2013-09-17 22:15:52 UTC
Wasn't saying the game should be perfectly balanced - saying that there needs to be a good balance between tweaking current content and adding new content. Personally I think currently theres too much rebalancing and not enough new content going on but at the same time I do acknowledge that there is a lot of legacy stuff that needs bringing upto date before they can concentrate fully on compltely new content.
Mors Magne
Terra Incognita
#9 - 2013-09-17 22:20:29 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Why add new ships when there are still dozens of useless ships.

Make broken ships useful, then we can add new ships to fill roles that are empty.

TLDR, disagree with OP


There will always be useless ships, partly because the number of ships vastly outnumbers the possible number of situations they can be used in.

Changing the ships just changes which ships will be useless.

The entertainment at the moment revolves around ganking the people who won't or can't keep up with the changes.
Orakkus
ImperiaI Federation
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2013-09-17 22:28:54 UTC
Mors Magne wrote:


It will never be possible to balance Eve Online in the perfect way you think is possible. This is because:

1) Eve is a game with too many variables to balance perfectly. E.g. Chess is as closely balanced as it's possible to get, but the odds still favour white.

2) A perfectly balanced game would probably get boring very fast.


That review in Massively is a lot like saying that a meal is bad before the chef has had a chance to finish it. The Tiercide project that CCP Fozzie, CCP Rise, and CCP Ytterbium have been working on has never been done before and of course some people aren't going to like it. It changes the entire dynamic of the game, which was starting to get stale because before players would recieve an update, and it would be geared toward changes to a particular race, then some ships in that race would suddenly become FOTM for a year a more. It really sucked because the balancing act was so one sided that entire play styles had to be scrapped because of a couple changes. The entire system needed a review from the ground level up.

That takes time, especially so it doesn't get boring. Remember we're only about 2/3rds of the way through this. We have Black Ops Battleships, Recons, Logistics, EAFs, Carriers, Dreads, Supercarriers, Titans, T2 Industrials, Marauders, Orcas, Rorquals, etc. So there are some big game changers still being looked at for change.

And that change does provide the tools to make content. But then again, content is based around the players.. not around the game.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
Turelus
Utassi Security
#11 - 2013-09-17 22:59:46 UTC
OP also remember that 1.1 was a patch not a expansion.
Winter should be adding new content or iteration on older content with new features, then we will see winter 1.1 which will be more patching and fixing.

As other have said some of these ships have been a joke since I joined five years ago, now you actually see Caldari ships in PVP and winning! Also remember this is mostly three guys working on the project, the rest of CCP's staff will be fixing other game issues or developing new content for winter.

Turelus CEO Utassi Security
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#12 - 2013-09-17 23:07:44 UTC
Mors Magne wrote:
There will always be useless ships, partly because the number of ships vastly outnumbers the possible number of situations they can be used in.

Changing the ships just changes which ships will be useless.
No. There will always be ships which are a poor choice for a particular role. Which is very different from "useless". Useless is being unable to function effectively at the role it was designed for. And that's what rebalancing corrects.

To be honest from your original post, your killboard, and the slant in the Massively article, it seems more like you are pouting over the Vagabond than anything else.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#13 - 2013-09-17 23:19:27 UTC
The ship rebalancing is more or less being done by a handful of devs in the first place. It's not using up that many resources anyway.

And secondly, considering how effed up some of the past ship design was precisely because they didn't focus on fixing existing content, but only on creating new content (much of which, like Incarna, was dumpstered anyway).

A balance of both is needed, yes. But the recent focus on revamping of existing content was/is neccessary due to the fact that so much of it has lain neglected for so long. In some cases, a decade.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Dr0000 Maulerant
Union Nanide and Tooling
#14 - 2013-09-18 00:26:13 UTC
I don't honestly know whether rebalancing is good for EVE, I loved it before and with the indy ship changes I'm happier than a pig in **** now.

I really wish ford would rebalance my 70's mustang.

Tell me again about how every playstyle you dont engage in "doesn't require any effort" and everyone who does it needs to die in a fire. Be sure to mention about how you tried it once but it was too easy/boring/ethnic-homophobic slur. 
Sigras
Conglomo
#15 - 2013-09-18 00:29:47 UTC
Mors Magne wrote:
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
I get the distinct impression that you don't really know WTF you are talking about.

If the rebalancing is being done cheaply by 1 person working for a few hours, it might be worth it. This is because changing things a bit might keep things interesting for some people.


If the rebalancing is costing a lot of money, then it's not worth the bad press it's getting.

yeah because I want the rebalancing of all the ships to be done by 1 person working for a few hours and then never looking at those ships again . . . thats a great idea. . .

Mors Magne wrote:
It will never be possible to balance Eve Online in the perfect way you think is possible. This is because:

1) Eve is a game with too many variables to balance perfectly. E.g. Chess is as closely balanced as it's possible to get, but the odds still favour white.

2) A perfectly balanced game would probably get boring very fast.

the game cant be and as far as extra credits is concerned shouldnt be perfectly balanced, but there shouldnt be ships which are good for nothing; and thats what you had before the rebalance.

I would challenge you to point out a ship that has gone through the rebalance that doesnt have a unique role or reason for existing like the old prophecy or the old maller.
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
#16 - 2013-09-18 00:38:58 UTC
If you expect themepark expansions for a sandbox game, you're going to be very disappointed. We create our own content, and the ship rebalancing (which is awesome btw) gives us improved tools to do so with.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
Luc Chastot
#17 - 2013-09-18 02:09:53 UTC
Signature.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Altered Ego
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#18 - 2013-09-18 02:47:38 UTC
-1

I want new content ... but I also want GOOD content.

And I would rather have good content before new.

The re-balancing initiative is the best thing to happen to EVE in a very long time. Why? Because with better ships, EVERYTHING in eve is now better, not just some panda feature that everyone will be tired of in 6 months.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#19 - 2013-09-18 03:47:06 UTC
It is conspicuous that new content is demanded but no suggestions for direction are given
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2013-09-18 04:48:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
I, for one, happy that devs are working on balance and not going to abandon it. There's nothing worse than seeing a lot of broken stuff around knowing that devs won't ever address that anymore, which happens to games at one point or another. Bonus points if modding is unrealistic.

Sure, we aren't getting that theoretical "perfect balance", but there is a difference between some ships being underwhelming and entire ship classes being worthless. Plus the tiericide provided newbros with much better tools - something that otherwise almost never happens in EVE.

Finally, there is a hope that CCP won't abandon the initiative entirely and will make some small fixes in the future to address existing concerns if they will be confirmed to be issues. I believe there is still work to be done.

New content would be nice, but having as much tools that are practical to work with said content is important too.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
123Next page