These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Natural Technology Improvements.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#21 - 2014-06-01 22:42:58 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
[

can I get a mach with a midrack full of MWD's then? fastest ship in the game - here I come!, ooooh - and I too would like a titan with AOE doomsday, oh and a drake that can reach out to 100km's whilst out-tanking a BS, that'd be lovely too. many thanks

all of the above were nerfed because they were OP - as well they should have been


Except you are overlooking the fact, that the technology for those other ships have gone up also. So even if you could get a drake that could reach out to 100km's, it would not be able to out tank a newer battleship, and the BS would have more reach as well.


Ok, just to clarify here, what part of "power creep is bad" do you not understand?
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2014-06-01 22:44:42 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Arden Elenduil wrote:


Seriously though, don't go for the route of "buffing something else to counteract something", but instead just nerf the thing that's causing problems.
Otherwise what you end up are ships that have ridiculous stats all around.


I don't think he quite gets it. Today's cars have rediculus stats if we compare them to the stats of a model T, but nobody drives them any more, except for leasure.

As technology increases, the difference becomes un-noticed.

A Mark 1 Cheetah with a Mark 1 covert ops cloaking device can hide from any ship.

a Mark 20 Cheetah with a Mark 20 covert ops cloaking device can also hide from any ship, and by that time, nobody will still be flying a Mark 1 or anything even close to that, unless it's for leasure.

The "power creep" is only an illusion because it's being compared to what we currently have, but nobody will have that any more. 10 years from now, everybody would have much more powerful ships that are no more capable than the ones of today.

A Mark 10 Maelstrom against a Mark 10 Tempest will be no different than a Mark 1 maelstrom against a Mark 1 tempest. The DEV's would simply make minor adjustments as the technology increases. If there was a BIG major problem, they could still nerf something, but this system will greatly reduce the need.



And a mark one Hurricane or Drake, which is basically thr navy versions we have now ans were both heavily nerfed, vs a mark two, IE the post nerf version?


How does your idea deal with ships that are overpowered? And how does your idea work with blueprints? Are they all, BPO and BPC upgraded to the newest model, or are people free to keep on building the pre nerf ships forevermore?



And the idea you are describing cannot be called anything but power creep. Who cares if a mk20 Mael vs a mk 20 Pest is the same? What about a mk 1 vs a mk 20?
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#23 - 2014-06-01 22:44:56 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
[

can I get a mach with a midrack full of MWD's then? fastest ship in the game - here I come!, ooooh - and I too would like a titan with AOE doomsday, oh and a drake that can reach out to 100km's whilst out-tanking a BS, that'd be lovely too. many thanks

all of the above were nerfed because they were OP - as well they should have been


Except you are overlooking the fact, that the technology for those other ships have gone up also. So even if you could get a drake that could reach out to 100km's, it would not be able to out tank a newer battleship, and the BS would have more reach as well.

The stats beg to differ, but if you're suggesting steadily increasing the stats then I look forward to seeing frigates with 200k ehp and battleships with 200 mill ehp.

Schrodinger's Hot Dropper

The Fate of Forum Alts

Guaranteed Success
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#24 - 2014-06-01 22:45:04 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
[

Ok, just to clarify here, what part of "power creep is bad" do you not understand?


We clearly have a mis-communication. How do you define "power creep"?
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2014-06-01 22:46:39 UTC
The point you are missing is that in a game, it's not a matter of technological progress, it's a matter of balance.

The original Titans could fire a doomsday through a Cyno & hit everything on grid. Remote fleet destruction, you didn't even have to be in the system.

Secondly, you are comparing a rapidly moving technological era (our own) with one that is thousands of years ahead. Instead of technological progress being rapid, you might be looking at years/decades or even centuries for a 1% improvement in any given technological system.

Tech 2 ships already serve as the next "mark" level of technology. On that scale, Jove Tech is Tech 5, and pre-collapse Terran tech is Tech 10.
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#26 - 2014-06-01 22:46:57 UTC
What you propose, is the exact definition of power creep.
It's buffing things to counteract another thing being OP
This leads to a vicious cycle in which you keep on buffing things until their stats start becoming ridiculous.

If we were to follow your plan, after 5 iterations you'd have battleships zooming around at 5km/s, dealing 10k dps while having a local tank of at least a couple million ehp.
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#27 - 2014-06-01 22:49:50 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:


And the idea you are describing cannot be called anything but power creep. Who cares if a mk20 Mael vs a mk 20 Pest is the same? What about a mk 1 vs a mk 20?


What about a race between an early race car and a modern day race car? Nobody drives the old ones anymore so it's moot. If you are flying a Mk 1 vs a mk 20, you are living in the EVE Museum, or you are a very VERY talented pilot, otherwise you would not be flying a Mk 1 against a Mk 20.
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2014-06-01 22:55:29 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
What you propose, is the exact definition of power creep.
It's buffing things to counteract another thing being OP
This leads to a vicious cycle in which you keep on buffing things until their stats start becoming ridiculous.

If we were to follow your plan, after 5 iterations you'd have battleships zooming around at 5km/s, dealing 10k dps while having a local tank of at least a couple million ehp.

A prime example is WoW, two people of equal level, at minimum level for an expansion's area (burning crusade, lets say), the one using the previous expansion/regions BEST gear would be at HALF the stats of someone using the WORST gear from the enw one.

They did this for EVERY expansion.

Then tey finally realized they ****** up and are doing an item crunch to de-power creep the 90 flavors of stupid that is 8million HP 50 million crit DPS characters (which have nearly 10x the HP and 100x the DPS of someone one level lower than them because of gear power creep)
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#29 - 2014-06-01 22:56:18 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:


And the idea you are describing cannot be called anything but power creep. Who cares if a mk20 Mael vs a mk 20 Pest is the same? What about a mk 1 vs a mk 20?


What about a race between an early race car and a modern day race car? Nobody drives the old ones anymore so it's moot. If you are flying a Mk 1 vs a mk 20, you are living in the EVE Museum, or you are a very VERY talented pilot, otherwise you would not be flying a Mk 1 against a Mk 20.


The reason why is because you are comparing real life to a video game.
The reason why they simply will not do it, is because they want to keep the game balanced.
It has been literally stated by the devs, that they are trying to actively avoid power creep, and your idea would introduce exactly that.
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#30 - 2014-06-01 22:56:23 UTC
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:
The point you are missing is that in a game, it's not a matter of technological progress, it's a matter of balance.

The original Titans could fire a doomsday through a Cyno & hit everything on grid. Remote fleet destruction, you didn't even have to be in the system.

Secondly, you are comparing a rapidly moving technological era (our own) with one that is thousands of years ahead. Instead of technological progress being rapid, you might be looking at years/decades or even centuries for a 1% improvement in any given technological system.

Tech 2 ships already serve as the next "mark" level of technology. On that scale, Jove Tech is Tech 5, and pre-collapse Terran tech is Tech 10.



The point YOU are missing, is that this provides a re-balance. There are still situations where there are bugs and perhaps some things still need to be nerfed, and the DEVs would do so as required. But this system replaced the need for it to be done as often.
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#31 - 2014-06-01 22:58:04 UTC
Your system would actually cause it to be required MORE often, just fyi
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-06-01 22:59:26 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:
The point you are missing is that in a game, it's not a matter of technological progress, it's a matter of balance.

The original Titans could fire a doomsday through a Cyno & hit everything on grid. Remote fleet destruction, you didn't even have to be in the system.

Secondly, you are comparing a rapidly moving technological era (our own) with one that is thousands of years ahead. Instead of technological progress being rapid, you might be looking at years/decades or even centuries for a 1% improvement in any given technological system.

Tech 2 ships already serve as the next "mark" level of technology. On that scale, Jove Tech is Tech 5, and pre-collapse Terran tech is Tech 10.



The point YOU are missing, is that this provides a re-balance. There are still situations where there are bugs and perhaps some things still need to be nerfed, and the DEVs would do so as required. But this system replaced the need for it to be done as often.

Yet with the system you are proposing the "nerf" would come as a buff to everything else. That is power creep.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2014-06-01 22:59:46 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:
The point you are missing is that in a game, it's not a matter of technological progress, it's a matter of balance.

The original Titans could fire a doomsday through a Cyno & hit everything on grid. Remote fleet destruction, you didn't even have to be in the system.

Secondly, you are comparing a rapidly moving technological era (our own) with one that is thousands of years ahead. Instead of technological progress being rapid, you might be looking at years/decades or even centuries for a 1% improvement in any given technological system.

Tech 2 ships already serve as the next "mark" level of technology. On that scale, Jove Tech is Tech 5, and pre-collapse Terran tech is Tech 10.



The point YOU are missing, is that this provides a re-balance. There are still situations where there are bugs and perhaps some things still need to be nerfed, and the DEVs would do so as required. But this system replaced the need for it to be done as often.


No, it would make it worse.

From my understanding, originally, there were plans to have 10 Tech levels in EVE. Those were scrapped, as they realized would wreck game balance completely.

What you are talking about is a system where you have to continuously grind to create new equipment to replace the equipment which came from last year. EVE's lack of mandatory grind is a positive, not a negative.
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#34 - 2014-06-01 23:00:14 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
What you propose, is the exact definition of power creep.
It's buffing things to counteract another thing being OP
This leads to a vicious cycle in which you keep on buffing things until their stats start becoming ridiculous.

If we were to follow your plan, after 5 iterations you'd have battleships zooming around at 5km/s, dealing 10k dps while having a local tank of at least a couple million ehp.


Well, lets go backwards in time for a moment. If we were to reverse this process, we would have battleships zooming around a 50 meters per second, dealing 100 dps while having a local tank of at least 10,000 ehp. But the battles would last just as long, be just as difficult relative to the technology of the time.
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#35 - 2014-06-01 23:03:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Arden Elenduil
Right, I'm just going to say this last thing and then give it up as a lost cause trying to make you see reason. It's not like the devs will ever take this thread seriously anyhow.

Your idea is bad, and you should feel bad about ever suggesting it.

'nuff said
Feather Storm
Tindalosian Trading Consortium
#36 - 2014-06-01 23:06:20 UTC
From a purely technical side this idea is a is nightmare of database bloat, it will require days or months of DEV work to check each tech progression for balance and will lead to "Big Number Syndrome." after all bigger numbers are always better why should I do one point of damage to this guys 10 point shield when I can do 10 points to his 100 point shield.

I'm sorry but this is just not a good idea.

Things change you adapt or you whine.

[u]Please note[/u]: Whining will alert the nearest predator resulting in death and the continuation of the EVE-olutionary process.
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#37 - 2014-06-01 23:06:59 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Yet with the system you are proposing the "nerf" would come as a buff to everything else. That is power creep.


NO! The "buff" does NOT apply to everything. You have to unlearn, what you have learned.

Let me put it to you this way.

For the next release, let's say the DEV's decided the Drake is too powerful. So they decide not to make a Mk 2 version of it for awhile. Instead they just go ahead with other Mk 2 versions, which is NOT everything. Maybe a couple of ships, maybe a couple of modules, and that's it. So you might end up with a Mk 2 huricane on the market (you can keep using your Mk 1 if you like).

The result would be a Drake that does not have as much of advantage as it previously did.

Now, if it was SOOOO over powered, then yes, the Dev's could still nerf it.
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#38 - 2014-06-01 23:11:24 UTC
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:


From my understanding, originally, there were plans to have 10 Tech levels in EVE. Those were scrapped, as they realized would wreck game balance completely.

What you are talking about is a system where you have to continuously grind to create new equipment to replace the equipment which came from last year. EVE's lack of mandatory grind is a positive, not a negative.


I think we are getting a little closer now. But nothing would be mandatory. If CCP felt it was time for a more up to date BS, then they add a MK 2, or 3 or whatever number is next.

If CCP decides that a Mk 2 space anchored cargo container pops too quickly, they just come up with a Mk 3 cargo contain that is a little tougher. You and I would still be stuck with the Mk 2 containers we already have, but we have the option to buy Mk 3 containers.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2014-06-01 23:17:07 UTC
Alia Ravenswing wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Yet with the system you are proposing the "nerf" would come as a buff to everything else. That is power creep.


NO! The "buff" does NOT apply to everything. You have to unlearn, what you have learned.

Let me put it to you this way.

For the next release, let's say the DEV's decided the Drake is too powerful. So they decide not to make a Mk 2 version of it for awhile. Instead they just go ahead with other Mk 2 versions, which is NOT everything. Maybe a couple of ships, maybe a couple of modules, and that's it. So you might end up with a Mk 2 huricane on the market (you can keep using your Mk 1 if you like).

The result would be a Drake that does not have as much of advantage as it previously did.

Now, if it was SOOOO over powered, then yes, the Dev's could still nerf it.

So you are proposing buffing several other things rather than nerf the drake. That is power creep.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Alia Ravenswing
DARK HAT
#40 - 2014-06-01 23:21:35 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

So you are proposing buffing several other things rather than nerf the drake. That is power creep.


CCP modifies things on every expansion. This is no different. only a few things would ever need to be modified, and only if they decided it was required.

All this is doing is applying a real world method to a game engine. It's actually very simple, but most people have trouble wrapping their brain around it, which is why I used car models as an example.

Previous page123Next page