These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Rebalancing EVE, one ship at a time

First post First post
Author
Melienia
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
The Carthaginian Solution
#801 - 2012-03-07 00:09:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Melienia
Aase Nord wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
So... My dear CCP devs.....
I can fly all races T3 cruisers...
and comandships...
with perfect leadership skills...
What am I going to loose ?


CCP Soundwave has repeatedly said you'll lose nothing. I suspect that you may lose ISK when you get podded because it'll push your total SP high enough to need a new clone type! :P

-Liang


Thank you for that ansver....
But....
I would like to hear that from CCP Smile


Seconded, for great justice. I want a definitive answer from CCP, with no ambiguity or having to 'read into it' in general. I want to see someone say "Well, since we're thinking about swapping generic dessy and BC for racial versions, we're gonna give all players who trained these skills the corresponding racial skills at the same level they've trained the generic ones to." How hard would that be? And until I see that, I can't believe the soothsayers claiming that all will be well! After all, the updated Devblog seems to hint (to me anyways) that when the dessy and BC skills go away, they're just going to do a sp refund for the skills in question. This doesn't work for me, as I regularly fly canes, drakes, myrms, etc. and don't feel it's fair that the ships I have will become useless as I don't have enough sp to go around to make it worthwhile to ship up in them (I.E. no bc 4 in a given race).

Edit: And before someone tells me to go back and read the dev posts for my answer, I say again: I want a DEFINITIVE answer on how it will work (sp reimbursement, or level cross-over).
Shade Millith
Farmhouse.
Simple Farmers
#802 - 2012-03-07 00:09:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Shade Millith
Quote:
Bombardment ships: provide heavy fire support to pin the enemy down with constant barrage of ordnance. Have great damage and range, average defense and mobility. Can be compared to artillery. EVE examples: Raven, Drake, caracal.


Completely stonking useless. Do you guys even play the game? They are NOT artillery. They are used as close range brawlers for a reason. Only fools use missile ships at long range, due to the travel time.

And I shudder to think how you guys will mutilate the Drake with trying to ham fist these ships into this completely stupid 'role'.
Alice Katsuko
Perkone
Caldari State
#803 - 2012-03-07 00:10:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Alice Katsuko
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:


  • Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

  • BS skill at IV for capitals: alright, there is good feedback on that. Point is to make the progression consistent by requiring a skill at 4 to train for the next, higher size class, and 5 for tech 2 ships. If we feel it becomes suddenly too easy to train for capitals, we can always compensate by adding that time back on one of the other, support skill prerequisites for them. Same reasoning applies for freighters. The point of this blog is to specifically discuss such matters before moving forward with them, and for this, you are welcome.



CONFUSING BLOG PICTURES:


  • Confusion between the skill tree change and the ship tree charts: the skill change displays where we want to bring you in the long term future with the overhaul, while the ship tree chart display the current, in-game TQ ship tree. We will show the updated, long term ship trees in the next blogs when they have been fleshed out a bit.



CSM NOT INCLUDED?!:


  • I will be honest by saying this is due to my own failure here, please do not blame CCP, or any other employee on that matter. I just plainly and simply forgot to include them in the feedback process; I know that sounds incredibly stupid, unbelievable or even naive, but you have to realize that between various work duties, procedures that have to be followed, internal meetings and reviews, random design emergencies, questions that pop-up from your team, plus being split into different projects that have to be finished in time, you are bound to forget things in the heat of the moment for being tremendously busy.

  • I will not attempt to justify myself however, this was a professional blunder on top of showing a serious lack of courtesy toward them as individuals, but also as elected representatives of the player base.

    Yes, I do fully acknowledge the value they could have brought to this blog before it was released. Trust me, had I remembered about it, this would have been done as it would have saved a lot of confusion here Oops.

    That is why, not only as a CCP employee, but also as an individual, I would sincerely like to apologize to every and each member of the CSM I forgot to include here. CSM, feel free to smack me in the back of my head during Fanfest to remind me that being absent-minded has life threatening, rage inducing consequences that should be avoided at all costs.



We will keep monitoring this thread and post updates in the next days if there are more issues coming up.


Many thanks for keeping us updated. Please consider linking to the quoted post in the very first post of this thread. Most folk are not going to go through 40 pages of text to find it, which is unfortunate because it addresses the vast majority of concerns.

Please also consider linking to Mittens' post.

Edit: But when balancing ships, please do not pigeonhole them into roles without a very good reason. It is one thing to provide the overall role. It is another to force players to only use a ship in a certain way. Just because certain ships are more popular then others, does not mean that there is a balance issue. And player creativity should not be sacrificed in order to achieve an ephemeral "balance."
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#804 - 2012-03-07 00:11:55 UTC
Melienia wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
So... My dear CCP devs.....
I can fly all races T3 cruisers...
and comandships...
with perfect leadership skills...
What am I going to loose ?


CCP Soundwave has repeatedly said you'll lose nothing. I suspect that you may lose ISK when you get podded because it'll push your total SP high enough to need a new clone type! :P

-Liang


Thank you for that ansver....
But....
I would like to hear that from CCP Smile


Seconded, for great justice. I want a definitive answer from CCP, with no ambiguity or having to 'read into it' in general. I want to see someone say "Well, since we're thinking about swapping generic dessy and BC for racial versions, we're gonna give all players who trained these skills the corresponding racial skills at the same level they've trained the generic ones to." How hard would that be? And until I see that, I can't believe the soothsayers claiming that all will be well! After all, the updated Devblog seems to hint (to me anyways) that when the dessy and BC skills go away, they're just going to do a sp refund for the skills in question. This doesn't work for me, as I regularly fly canes, drakes, myrms, etc. and don't feel it's fair that the ships I have will become useless as I don't have enough sp to go around to make it worthwhile to ship up in them (I.E. no bc 4 in a given race).

Edit: And before someone tells me to go back and read the dev posts for my answer, I say again: I want a DEFINITIVE answer on how it will work (sp reimbursement, or level cross-over).


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=900335#post900335

If you read the dev comments, you'd know.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Laura Dexx
The Congregation
HIDDEN LEAF VILLAGE NINJA AssAssIn SQUAD eSports
#805 - 2012-03-07 00:13:45 UTC
james1122 wrote:
Laura Dexx wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
words words words


Why are you ignoring Black Ops Battleships? Why does it take less time to get into a ******* powerful dreadnought than a gimped overpriced shitmobile?

I think having Battleship v as a requirement for training capital ships is pretty frigging necessary. Here's a graph on how raw hit points increase per ship class, notice how it just dwarfs the rest of the ship classes:

This is why racial battleship V needs to stay in the prerequisites of everything capital!

Surely that sort of massive increase in raw HP warrants a little bit longer training time? Or do you really want this game to turn even more into a capital borefest than it is already?


Confirming that its all about raw HP


If you're trying to appeal to ridicule, at least try to disprove.
Bawsk
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#806 - 2012-03-07 00:14:33 UTC
Quote:

CCP Ytterbium wrote
This opens up possibilities in terms of new ships. For example, why does the Amarr drone and tracking disruption line ends with the Arbitrator? Or the Gallente drone and dampening abilities stop with the Exequror? Can’t Minmatar use short range missile platforms to make use of that target painting bonus



So are we talking about a Brutix style ship with sensor damp bonus's, and Prophecy tanked ship
with tracking disruption bonus's?
Maybe even a Typhoon with a target painting bonus?

Maybe mix it up even more and give them some of the Recon ship bonus's. Harby's that can Neut like crazy
and cyclones with ranged webbs , Megathron's scrambling people at 30km >:)

Caldari have the scorpion after all, why not spread the love around a bit.
Maybe even give them a new/ existing BC that can Jam too. "OMG THE FEROX HAS ME JAMMED, KILLITKILLITKILLIT" lol

I'm interested in seeing some concept idea's of giving the bigger ship classes some ewar options

-Bawsk-

Law of Conservation of Happiness: Happiness is neither created nor destroyed, only stolen from other people.


Sovai Elaaren
KABS Deep Recon Unit
#807 - 2012-03-07 00:14:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Sovai Elaaren
Haleuth wrote:
This looks to me like the start of "lets balance all the classes and dumb the game down"

Strange that the only time i ever need to read these forums is when other people tell me ingame that soundwave wants to make stupid changes.

You should get a grip tbh.

You promised/insinuated a gradual progression in ships and equipment from t1-t2-t3 and beyond, you deliver t3 cruisers and thats it.

You talk about balancing broken ships by increasing training time instead of tweaking the broken ships.

You promised/insinuated that we'd be fighting in space ships within a planets atmosphere, you deliver an FPS.

You promised/insinuated mining revamps to "bring back the gold rush" and deliver nothing.

You set up faction war round tables and dont turn up.

Instead of cunjuring up more crazy ideas how about doing some of the stuff you as a company have been saying your going to do for nearly a decade?

How about dealing with the remote repair agro mechanic thats been pissing folk off for nearly a decade?

Nah dont bother, get yourself back to the pub and magic your next stupid idea out of your arse.



Where's that dislike button people have been asking for?

CCP is getting back on track, dude. They don't have a magic wand to suddenly fix everything that we've been wanting in this game for years. This dev blog is proof that they are trying to fix things (along with the Crucible expansion and the iterations since then as well). They're not trying to fix anything by simply increasing training time, but by creating roles for ships to fill and then balancing them to fit within those roles so they're useful.
AtvMX
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#808 - 2012-03-07 00:14:50 UTC
Sentient Blade wrote:
Eugh.... Just what we always wanted... having to spend even *MORE* time cross-training to experience the different races and play styles of EvE.

Battlecruisers is one of the best skills there is for a very good reason; you spend a month training it and then it gives you lots of flexibility. You get it, and it opens lots of doors... and variety is what people enjoy.

If you do this, then a lot of people, myself included, are going to be pissed. It's introducing more drag just for the hell of it.



this.
CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
#809 - 2012-03-07 00:15:31 UTC
Alice Katsuko wrote:
Please consider linking to the quoted post in the very first post of this thread.


Already is! Smile But still thank you for the good idea.

CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer

Fenrir Ragnarok
Sicarii Ma'at
#810 - 2012-03-07 00:15:42 UTC
With so many broken mechanics in game why the focus on something that is not causing any distress?

Trying to keep the promise of people being able to fly all they flew before the change is a huge undertaking ... firstly the 3 BC and 6 command ships many people will loose, then the 3 dessies and 3 interdictors .

Also what about alts that people use to get ships to their mains involved in wars/piracy etc? , together potentially 15 ships per toon, worst case 45 ships on an account?

How about stop this madness and fix capital blob fests so null sec becomes somewhere everyone can play

Hope the next idea isnt racial training command ships/Hacs/recons/Hics/logistics ...... its a slippery slope
Tyme Xandr
Weyl Manufacturing
#811 - 2012-03-07 00:16:29 UTC
+1 to CCP for finally making all the useless frigates/cruisers and feroxes something applicable to the damned game. I (and many others) have been stating this for years in the F&I section.
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#812 - 2012-03-07 00:17:26 UTC
Laura Dexx wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
words words words


Why are you ignoring Black Ops Battleships? Why does it take less time to get into a ******* powerful dreadnought than a gimped overpriced shitmobile?

I think having Battleship v as a requirement for training capital ships is pretty frigging necessary. Here's a graph on how raw hit points increase per ship class, notice how it just dwarfs the rest of the ship classes:

This is why racial battleship V needs to stay in the prerequisites of everything capital!

Surely that sort of massive increase in raw HP warrants a little bit longer training time? Or do you really want this game to turn even more into a capital borefest than it is already?


Yet another person that didn't really read the blog.
Skill changes is the first step in change to abolish tiers and let them balance ships by class and function instead of just where they happen to fit in implied progression. Skills are just the first base change in a class by class balance adjustment. And that these ship classes will get new specialization skills which can and will likely fill in those cap training gaps and add more time to all ships to keep older players still interested (at least to some degree) with the ships that are currently tier 1.
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#813 - 2012-03-07 00:17:56 UTC
Zaxix wrote:
Since 99% of all comments are about SP reimbursement, it sounds like your core idea is getting indirect approval.

As to BS V for capital ships, will you also be lowering the Racial Industrial V requirement for freighters? Or any of the level V skill requirements for jump freighters? Looking at the progressions in the dev blog (and not having evemon at work), I'm not clear on whether training times and SP amounts for freighters/jump freighters in general will be going up, down, or staying the same. While it may have always been the case, I was surprised to see dreads took less time to get into than a jump freighter--that seemed odd to me.

What about the jump freighter skill? It's not race specific. Will you be altering that line as well? Can you afford to reimburse me for some SERIOUS skill point totals? On what basis would those points be awarded? The current discussion seems to be "I can fly all races now, so I should get skill points for all of them when the time comes." Well, I can fly all jump freighters now...


Jump Freighters will continue to require Level 5 because they are T2 (all T2 require now and will according to the devblog continue to require Level 5).

The Question about freighters is relevant though (I personally don't care as I have the prerequisites). I personally think they should continue to require Level 5 as they are a significant step up from their "skill predecessor". There should be SOME commitment. It already only takes about a month to get into one anyway...
Mordo Mordaeus
Hawaiian Huulajuice
#814 - 2012-03-07 00:18:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Mordo Mordaeus
sounds good except that we who already got the skills required now, should get them for free.. Otherwise it is like... I go to a shop and buy let's say a car for cash, then efter two years the Dealer comes back to me and says i have to pay the car again....
If that is the plan, you can go stick something up yours ccp...
But on the other hand, It's all about squeezing that extra out money out of us, right?

Mordo Mordaeus Pirate and humanitarian.. ;)

Basil Wenclas
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#815 - 2012-03-07 00:18:45 UTC
Akara Ito wrote:
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Isn't it our job to define roles for particular ships, not yours?


This is my problem with this blog

Skill lines sounds like an awfull euphenism for getting warrior ships, mage ships, shaman ships, etc

Limiting ships to a single role is bullshit
One of the great things about Eve is that you can fly every ship as you want
PvP in Eve is often about finding a fitting that suits your need and getting effects out of ships that people dont expect

And yeah, racial BC skills are... weird.
Actually I dont know why they are even usefull.
Right now the skill system is mostly tree based, it splits up more and more the higher you get
Whats the advantage of turning this into a single line system?
Its just annoying and a huge oversimplification.

Oh and BS 4 for caps is horrible, a shitload of people crossskill caps and I guess there will be no sp reimbursement for BSV .
You'd have to reimburse so much skills to get these things done, its pathetic.


This is my main problem with this as well.

I have no problem with racial dessy/bc skills, it always confused me why those weren't around in the first place. But I really don't like this ship classification idea. Let us define what's used for what. After all, as has been evidenced, WE are the ones that play the game.

The particular role bonuses for ships already help define what they are good for. This just sounds like a dumbing down of the game.

Not that this will make a difference, we all know it's going to be rammed through anyways.
Melienia
THE BOARD OF EDUCATION
The Carthaginian Solution
#816 - 2012-03-07 00:19:12 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Melienia wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Aase Nord wrote:
So... My dear CCP devs.....
I can fly all races T3 cruisers...
and comandships...
with perfect leadership skills...
What am I going to loose ?


CCP Soundwave has repeatedly said you'll lose nothing. I suspect that you may lose ISK when you get podded because it'll push your total SP high enough to need a new clone type! :P

-Liang


Thank you for that ansver....
But....
I would like to hear that from CCP Smile


Seconded, for great justice. I want a definitive answer from CCP, with no ambiguity or having to 'read into it' in general. I want to see someone say "Well, since we're thinking about swapping generic dessy and BC for racial versions, we're gonna give all players who trained these skills the corresponding racial skills at the same level they've trained the generic ones to." How hard would that be? And until I see that, I can't believe the soothsayers claiming that all will be well! After all, the updated Devblog seems to hint (to me anyways) that when the dessy and BC skills go away, they're just going to do a sp refund for the skills in question. This doesn't work for me, as I regularly fly canes, drakes, myrms, etc. and don't feel it's fair that the ships I have will become useless as I don't have enough sp to go around to make it worthwhile to ship up in them (I.E. no bc 4 in a given race).

Edit: And before someone tells me to go back and read the dev posts for my answer, I say again: I want a DEFINITIVE answer on how it will work (sp reimbursement, or level cross-over).


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=900335#post900335

If you read the dev comments, you'd know.


Much appreciated. When I started writing my post, that dev response hadn't been written yet. Kudos to Ytterbium for the clarification! I feel much better now...
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
#817 - 2012-03-07 00:19:49 UTC
Good grief, 40 pages of posts already.

Sorry if I repeat anyone previously, but I haven't read the whole thread.

My first reaction to the early part of the blog was..... "Oh great, a skill tree massive change that will inevitably mean more training to fly the ships we can fly currently....just what we've all been begging for....WTF (sarcasm)"

Further reading though suggests you CCP funambulist boffins might actually be doing these changes for the right reasons.... Reasons such as the current tier system breaking dow2n every time you add a new ship, and to reinvigorate and find useful applications for the masses of currently useless (and correctly overlooked by players') ships that for slot layout and/or base stats dont compete with the better more useful ships of their class.

This approach will hopefully see a return of more unique racial flavours to ships and fundamentally shake up the game allowing for a better, more expansive list of useful current ships with a potential for easier expandable base of future ships. This all makes good sense.

The major concern I have is CCP timescales.

You appear to be keen and ready to go with rolling out skill system changes (fine), but what use is that to us players if the ship lines are not brought up to date?

By proceeding so (inevitably) slowly in a 1 by 1 manner of balancing you're really going to make a mockery of game continuity. Today the taranis is excellent, tomorrow it might be awesome, but the following week the 'new' rifter is actually better.

In summary CCP:
I forsee you embarking on this journey on a bright sunny day, full of vim and vigour, walking down a clear path towards the promised land of some balanced ship Utopia, only to find the surrounding environment changes unpredictably and dramatically with each step, and unsurprisingly a few steps in you're in a mire with storm clouds gathering round and great pressure upon you to speed up before you sink further into the mire, however with each step the path ahead becomes less clear.

My message to you is this: Tread very carefully CCP.


I feel you might be better for example trying to bang out the massive required ship changes in big blocks of ships like week 1 - All t1 frigates, week 2 All t1cruisers, week 3 all t2 frigates. week 4 all t2 cruisers etc etc
You'd need to move THAT quickly imho to actually keep true to any ideal of a full rebalance/restructure of ship classes.

Thats all I have to say about it for now though. Cheers.
Harrigan VonStudly
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#818 - 2012-03-07 00:20:05 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Zaxix wrote:

The training times for these is heinous, so we'd like to get as much lead time as possible to know how to address this.

Thanks


Everyone, please note that the very first post in this thread confirms that no one will be retraining. They will most likely be throwing skill points at you to grab the stuff you need to fly what you already have. And if everyone complains loudly enough, probably a few more.

Just trying to keep down on the forum thread clutter, no sense going on and on about skill retraining if it there will be no disruptions in game play over it (and you may come out ahead depending on how the bribe goes!)


I don't want to just be able to "fly" what I can already fly. I want to EFFECTIVELY fly what I can already EFFECTIVELY fly. And that effectiveness is a lot related to the skill level ie; I II III IV V, bonuses applied for that ship hull. In other words I have Minmatar and Amarr cruiser V which does not affect the Myrm or Drake because I have BC V from which their bonuses are derived.
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#819 - 2012-03-07 00:21:12 UTC
Antoine Jordan wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:

[list]
  • Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

  • Does this include the races which I don't have the cruiser skill at 4?


    This is a good question. I'll probably train cruiser 4 in all races just to be super sure and I suggest everyone does the same.
    Red Teufel
    Calamitous-Intent
    Feign Disorder
    #820 - 2012-03-07 00:22:00 UTC
    I love you long time ccp.