These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#1621 - 2012-03-09 08:01:51 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Q: can we opt out for skills we don't want during the reimbursement process?

  • A: well, again, it depends on how it is done. We may just bluntly give all four variants at V if you had battlecruiser V for example, or maybe require that you also add the relevant Cruiser skill trained at level 3 to be eligible. On the latter case, just don't train the cruiser 3 skill, and you should not receive the new racial battlecruiser at 5. Not sure why one would do that however, it's like skipping free candy or cake while visiting your grandma.

    Example:
  • If we go for option 1: you will get Amarr, Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar Battlecruiser skills at 5 if you previously had the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5.
  • If we go for option 2: you will get Amarr Battlecruiser skill at 5 only if you previously fulfilled all conditions to fly Amarr Battlecruisers, which means having the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5, PLUS the Amarr Cruiser at 3.

  • To remind it again, there are other options to consider, but no matter which one which choose, you won't lose anything out of the skill reimbursement plan.


    Please go for option 2. Or enable us to opt out racial skills, we don't want.

    I have characters crosstraining heavily (racial cruiser at 3 would be no issue here) and I have some, that are very focused on race. And I definitely want the latter to continue that way.

    Remove standings and insurance.

    Tippia
    Sunshine and Lollipops
    #1622 - 2012-03-09 08:09:37 UTC
    Mara Pahrdi wrote:
    Please go for option 2. Or enable us to opt out racial skills, we don't want.
    Yes we do.

    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Andski wrote:
    "In order to simplify ship progression, we're going to split these two skills into rank 6 racial variants and make them prerequisites for further training. This will benefit new players" - CCP Ytterbium, 2012
    Someone stole my point Cool
    Come to think of it, if new players were given slight pause for thought before they rush for battleships, that probably would benefit them. Smile
    Tesco Yogurt
    OMFG Industries
    #1623 - 2012-03-09 08:11:23 UTC
    Kozmic wrote:
    CCP Soundwave wrote:
    Kozmic wrote:

    Yes - cause God knows CCP never promised anything it didn't follow through. Enjoing walking around your establishments talking to other players in sov-iterated 0.0 with fixed supercaps, are you?


    Heaven forbid a game company talk about what they want to do with their game in the future.


    Sorry for being a bit bitter, but it will take more than one half-decent expansion to get back into my good graces.


    LOL who gives a **** about your good graces? Entitlement much? Don't like it, don't play it.
    Shannae Darkehart
    Ministry of War
    Amarr Empire
    #1624 - 2012-03-09 08:16:54 UTC
    As a heavily cross trained pilot myself, count in my vote for being concerned about my ability to continue flying ships I already own. Thank you, CCP, for taking the time to get feedback before making any such critical changes to the game. I look forward to reading the CSM8 minutes of this discussion (That's a hinthint with a lil nudgenudge for you.).

    I have to say, that if done correctly, the changes outlined within the devblog hold significant promise, but I am less concerned with the minutae of reimbursements (trusting that we will be able to fly something tomorrow if we can fly it today) and more concerned with the efficacy with which we fly them. Just being able to get into say, my Drake, isn't the same thing as flying a Drake that has the level 5 shield resists bonus. On that note, I link back to a blog snagged from an earlier posters signature and get on with the meat of my feedback:

    http://carebearconfessions.blogspot.com/2012/03/on-ships-skills-and-balancing.html

    This idea, as the kernel for a line of ship role specific skills and associated bonuses, has a lot of merit. I especially like the part where a dedicated alt can skip significant amounts of training in ship sizes they don't care about. Simultaneously, a new player being guided by an existing player or solid corporation can begin to contribute to that group much sooner, despite having fewer ship bonuses in whatever they fly ('cause let's face it, if you come to EVE to play with a friend who runs missions, your tech 1 frig isn't gonna help that much on a level 4, as an example). A similar pass of weapon related skills is required.

    Expanding upon the framework of Spaceship Command and Advanced Spaceship Command presented in the blog, there could be an assortment of new skills sorted along the "Ship Lines" referenced in the CCP Devblog. You could add, say, a line of skills all labeled with a "Captain" designation. Industrial Captain, Logistics Captain (defensive support), Electronic Superiority Captain (offensive support), Artillery Captain, Assault Captain, Blockade Captain could be the list, for an example.

    There is some satisfying potential in the thought of dropping your Certificate for Elite Assault Captain on a virtual table in an Establishment while engaged in a genital size contest. (This is your subtle reminder not to forget the poor mutant bastard child that is Incarna amidst all of this Crucible and Inferno business.)

    These skills could apply an additional role suitable bonus that is the same across the board for all ships of the appropriate "line". For an example, Assault Captain could provide small increases to rate of fire, maximum velocity, and ship agility for all ships of the Assault line, regardless of race or size category. Blockade Captain, fitting in the "ship of the line" category, could provide an additional amount of shield, armour, and structure to all Blockade line ships, contributing to their ability to actually serve as the solid core of a firing line. Artillery Captain will require a larger number of effects to accommodate the fact that missiles and turrets calculate their ranges in different fashions. Industrial Captain, similarly, has a lot of ground to cover.

    In my suggestion, these are flat out in addition to the existing statistics of sub capital ships. Cap ships would not receive this bonus, as a small part of combating the proliferation of cap ship fleets. The Captain line shouldn't, in of itself, render cap ships obsolete, but provides a more interesting assortment of skill choices and possibly some additional decision making tension. For example, a small fleet of cap ships that might laugh at a fleet of battleships (below an obscene critical mass of battleships, anyway) might be a lot more respectful when an entire Wing of Assault line ships tears into one of them. I don't have any further thoughts on cap warfare balance at this time, but a small and universal increase in sub-cap ship capabilities couldn't hurt the situation.

    I would suggest seeding these skillbooks some amount of time in advance of enabling their effects, to give our intrepid wormhole folks (amongst others) time to acquire copies and train up.

    I feel like I'm forgetting something, but I'm sure I got the point across. I do have a pet peeve for you, though, in regards to the CCP Devblog: Considering the semi mythical status of the Drake as a tank, the Drake and Ferox ought to be switched in your list. A lot of other ships should be classified out as examples, too, such as putting say, the Apoc into the Artillery Captain / Bombardment Line category.

    Ah, I just reminded myself the thing I was forgetting. As a few other posters have referenced, you should also not go overboard on the new ships or any redesigns that result form sorting ships into role categories. The different races should feel MORE distinctive, not less, as a result of this implementation. For example, my beloved golden fleet should embrace primarily Blockade Captains, while our corporate Caldari friends should represent the masters of Artillery. The Gallente Federation can take an emphasis on Blockade Captain ships to provide the backbone for the dramatic proportion of their rebel, ahem, Republic, allies that are Assault Captains.

    There's my two kredits. Cool

    I'm sorry if you feel there's a legitimate reason for botting but there isn't and that's basically that. Not liking a game doesn't entitle you to cheat. Ever. At all. Enough with the moral equivalency please. ~CCP Sreegs

    Shannae Darkehart
    Ministry of War
    Amarr Empire
    #1625 - 2012-03-09 08:42:28 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Steve Ronuken wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium? I don't suppose I could get you to say that it won't be an SP reimbursement, but instead just sticking the new skills onto people, at the appropriate level? I'm pretty sure that's what you've been meaning, but it's also obvious some people are thinking they'll get the chance to respend the points at will.


    As for Destroyers:

    Typically, a destroyer is a fleet defense boat. It already handles the anti-frigate line ok, so how about something for handling fleet missile defense? Or maybe an E-Warfare role.
    Maybe something cloaky or Bomb defense related?



    Well reimbursement is tricky, can't say about details yet, because we still need to think about them. Whatever this is going to be SP reimbursement or just sticking new skills, or whatever options in the middle still need to be considered.

    Funny, I got somebody suggesting the very same idea regarding destroyers having a fleet defense role to me during lunch P*insert tinfoil hat theory here*


    Scanning through the thread again, I came across this and immediately thought, "You know, additional base tech 1 Destroyer hulls and some tech 2 variants of them might be worth investigating." The faster moving lower throughput Logistics ship idea is popular on the forums, for example, and could find a home here.

    You could even throw down something in the same vein as the Battlecruisers with oversized guns approach. The question would be, 8 medium turrets, or a single solitary large turret? ... both? >.>

    I'm sorry if you feel there's a legitimate reason for botting but there isn't and that's basically that. Not liking a game doesn't entitle you to cheat. Ever. At all. Enough with the moral equivalency please. ~CCP Sreegs

    Vaerah Vahrokha
    Vahrokh Consulting
    #1626 - 2012-03-09 08:57:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
    Tippia wrote:
    Mara Pahrdi wrote:
    Please go for option 2. Or enable us to opt out racial skills, we don't want.
    Yes we do.

    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Andski wrote:
    "In order to simplify ship progression, we're going to split these two skills into rank 6 racial variants and make them prerequisites for further training. This will benefit new players" - CCP Ytterbium, 2012
    Someone stole my point Cool
    Come to think of it, if new players were given slight pause for thought before they rush for battleships, that probably would benefit them. Smile


    Yet, you stated it's good for them to be able and rush into T2 ship sooner!
    Tippia
    Sunshine and Lollipops
    #1627 - 2012-03-09 09:18:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Yet, you stated it's good for them to be able and rush into T2 ship sooner!
    I said it's good for them to be able to specialise sooner, and the inherent allure of T2 isn't nearly as great as that of a BS (largely because new players have a tendency to think in flawed bigger = better terms).

    Newbies rushing to battleships in an age-old problems, and while having to wait a few more days won't keep them from rushing there, it gives them a tiny bit more time to think about it. Reducing the time to specialise from 100+ days to 80 days simply means the mountain won't seem as insurmountable and will maybe hint that this is actually a useful way to go. We're still talking about timeframes where “rushing into T2” is a gross exaggeration.
    ChromeStriker
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #1628 - 2012-03-09 09:27:34 UTC
    Tippia wrote:
    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Yet, you stated it's good for them to be able and rush into T2 ship sooner!
    I said it's good for them to be able to specialise sooner, and the inherent allure of T2 isn't nearly as great as that of a BS (largely because new players have a tendency to think in flawed bigger = better terms).

    Newbies rushing to battleships in an age-old problems, and while having to wait a few more days won't keep them from rushing there, it gives them a tiny bit more time to think about it. Reducing the time to specialise from 100+ days to 80 days simply means the mountain won't seem as insurmountable and will maybe hint that this is actually a useful way to go. We're still talking about timeframes where “rushing into T2” is a gross exaggeration.


    Tippia are you on some crusade against stupidity? i think you have pretty much crushed evey stupid comment that cpp hasn't been bothered with Smile

    No Worries

    Vaerah Vahrokha
    Vahrokh Consulting
    #1629 - 2012-03-09 10:19:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
    Tippia wrote:
    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Yet, you stated it's good for them to be able and rush into T2 ship sooner!
    I said it's good for them to be able to specialise sooner, and the inherent allure of T2 isn't nearly as great as that of a BS (largely because new players have a tendency to think in flawed bigger = better terms).

    Newbies rushing to battleships in an age-old problems, and while having to wait a few more days won't keep them from rushing there, it gives them a tiny bit more time to think about it.


    1) I would not illude anyone about "thinking about it". We are talking about human beings here, not about wise forms of life.

    2) You call "rushing to battleships" a problem, I call it a learning opportunity.

    Flying a crappy fit Raven with crappy skills and getting owned in the first L4 = good. Next time he L2notPLEXhisWayInEvE.


    This is the sandboxy, player caused and centered way to put a bar into rushing in content.

    Making an artificial bar / enabler by delaying skills (because this is the end what CCP wants to do. Else they'd split into racial skills whilst reducing the total learning time to get all BC to V) is not as sandboxy nor is player centered.
    Darek Castigatus
    Immortalis Inc.
    Shadow Cartel
    #1630 - 2012-03-09 10:22:48 UTC
    Its what he does, personally I'm very grateful as constant facepalming makes my head hurt after a while P

    Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

    you're welcome

    Akara Ito
    Phalanx Solutions
    #1631 - 2012-03-09 11:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Akara Ito
    Tippia wrote:
    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Yet, you stated it's good for them to be able and rush into T2 ship sooner!
    I said it's good for them to be able to specialise sooner, and the inherent allure of T2 isn't nearly as great as that of a BS (largely because new players have a tendency to think in flawed bigger = better terms).

    Newbies rushing to battleships in an age-old problems, and while having to wait a few more days won't keep them from rushing there, it gives them a tiny bit more time to think about it. Reducing the time to specialise from 100+ days to 80 days simply means the mountain won't seem as insurmountable and will maybe hint that this is actually a useful way to go. We're still talking about timeframes where “rushing into T2” is a gross exaggeration.


    I always thought people beeing able to fly large and expensive ships before they actually know how to use them is a good idea.
    Every time I see somebody crying because he lost his Nightmare with his 6m sp char is awesome.

    Let people be dumb, if only for the fun of the rest of EvE.

    Oh and I'd say beeing forced to skill Destroyers sucks a lot more as theres only a single damn ship you get with that, and thats mostly useless after L1 Missions and forced unloading of Industrials in Jita.
    Gempei
    Marvinovi pratele
    The Bastion
    #1632 - 2012-03-09 11:14:35 UTC
    Tippia wrote:
    [Racial] Frigate III + Destroyer n → [racial] Destroyer n.
    [Racial] Cruiser III + Battlecruiser n → [racial] Battlecruiser n.

    Why so overcomplicated? You have bc or destroyer skill on lvl X, you will get racial bc skill on this level (skill, no free skill points) - you can fly exact the same ships as before. Only clones are more expensive.

    Btw, when you have bc on lvl5, training 3 racial battlecruiser are 6 day - everybody train them, exact same situation as with training bc and destroyer skill on lvl5 Big smile
    Gempei
    Marvinovi pratele
    The Bastion
    #1633 - 2012-03-09 11:28:35 UTC
    Cindy Marco wrote:
    Younger and new players are going to be punished. Now it will take them 4 times longer to train for BCs and destroyers then it did for me. And for no good reason.

    How many new player fly with 2 or 3 racial bc/destroyer? Lol Battlecruiser lvl 4 is only 4 days and destroyer 1,5 day, that is nothing in EVE.
    Calladad
    Imperial Academy
    Amarr Empire
    #1634 - 2012-03-09 11:47:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Calladad
    I like the changes on the skills needed for flying certain ships. Where the changes needed, maybe not, but they are ok.

    I think that rebalancing ships is great thing, helps to change the current meta (I play lol) and keep FC changing their tactics and evolve which is good.

    However, when it comes to ship balancing issues looking forward, I would like you to keep a few things in mind when determining a role for ships not currently being used much.

    As a player in a corp doing primarily small gang pvp, 10-30 people including links, scouts etc, there are times when you do highly specialised fleets such as alpha tornados. Those fleets are so specialised that you can only engage under certain conditions meaning that sometimes you cant take a fight and often other fleets wont fight you (who jumps into a alpha fleet sitting 70k of a gate with a sabre on the gate?)

    Same thing with rr bs being neutralised by bombers and other examples like that. My point is, that while having counters to specialised fleets is good, it shouldnt be that way that people set out looking for fights in specialised fleets and end up going home without a fight simply because the right target wasnt there.

    I understand that theres a huge difference from roaming fleets and fleets meant for tower/customs/SBU bashing but at least for roaming fleets finding the right fleet to fight can be difficult at times. So, when rebalancing, I would like to see you create ships that will either fit into existing fleets, or will make it possible to create new fleets which can engange several diffierent kinds of fleets.

    Good fights are the ones, that last for more than 30 seconds, where people on both sides die and where the individual pilot makes a difference. Good fights are not pressing F1 and see that lone straggler instapop.

    I dont like the drake fleets much, but I understand why its being used as much as it is. It can engange a wide variety of enemies meaning the risk to go home with blue balls is reduced (if you fly a drake blob, then its prolly the blob rather than the drake).
    Tengues are another good example (albeit expensive), they can snipe and brawl depending on enemy and the individual pilot skill is important.

    Does it make sense? I DONT want fleets that are identical and which doesnt evolove because counters are found, but tbh a good fight means everything in eve and any change that will bring more of those are welcome.
    Tippia
    Sunshine and Lollipops
    #1635 - 2012-03-09 12:02:00 UTC
    Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
    Making an artificial bar / enabler by delaying skills (because this is the end what CCP wants to do. Else they'd split into racial skills whilst reducing the total learning time to get all BC to V) is not as sandboxy nor is player centered.
    It has roughly zero to do with the sandbox — the tools are still there and the uses for them are exactly the same.

    Also, the overall improvements made by this changes makes it player-centred as hell.

    Akara Ito wrote:
    Let people be dumb, if only for the fun of the rest of EvE.

    Oh and I'd say beeing forced to skill Destroyers sucks a lot more as theres only a single damn ship you get with that, and thats mostly useless after L1 Missions and forced unloading of Industrials in Jita.

    Oh don't worry, there's still plenty of opportunity to be dumb — even more so with this change than before it, since this one means you're not lead by the nose quite as much… and that always leads to new opportunities to screw up. Also, new players can still be just as dumb and rush to it. Now they're just given a slightly bigger hint that maybe this is farther up the ship progression scale than they want to be — giving them a week an a half to figure that out rather than a week is just some gentle prodding. Blink

    As for Destroyers, sure, but they're aware of that and are thinking of ways to remedy it.

    Gempei wrote:
    Why so overcomplicated? You have bc or destroyer skill on lvl X, you will get racial bc skill on this level (skill, no free skill points) - you can fly exact the same ships as before. Only clones are more expensive.
    Because that's as simple as you can get if you want to follow the “keep what you have” philosophy. What you're suggesting would actually allow people to fly more than they already can. As for free skill-points, it's inevitable no matter how you do it, but it's also completely irrelevant (unless you meant that they shouldn't dump any SP in our redistribution pools, in which case, yes, I agree).
    Danny Husk
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #1636 - 2012-03-09 13:40:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Danny Husk
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Example:
  • Before, training for a Harbinger required you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Cruiser 3 and Battlecruisers at 2
  • Before, training for an Absolution required you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Cruiser 5, Battlecruiser at 5 and Heavy Assault Ships at 4
  • Now, training for a Harbinger requires you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Destroyer 4, Amarr Cruiser 4 and then Amarr Battlecruiser at 1.
  • Now, training for an Absolution requires you to train for Amarr Frigate 4, Amarr Destroyer 4, Amarr Cruiser 4 and Amarr Battlecruiser at 5. There is no more need for the Amarr Cruiser 5 and Heavy Assault Ship at 4.
  • The reason your answers to these questions aren't making any sense is because you are still dancing around the one simple problem that obviously drives this entire plan: The Drake.

    The whole thing comes down to this: We put some ships called BCs in the game a while back, and one of them was stupidly OP. In fact it was so stupidly OP that our T2 cruisers are an embarassment compared to it. This is even more of a problem since the T2 cruiser takes 5x as long to get into. We see now that this stupidly OP ship never should have happened, or should have been just another Tech 2 hull. But we can't nerf it, because people will scream bloody murder. And we can't buff the T2 cruisers, because then they would be stupidly OP.

    So what we're gonna do is: move all the BCs far enough up the training curve to put them out of the reach of vile noobs; pull the T2 cruisers down the curve a bit to make them seem like a better deal; then make all the other BCs just as stupidly OP.

    Balance achieved.

    Also we'll throw in some new dessies. Maybe. And caps will be 30 days shorter. So it all works out in the end.
    Danny Husk
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #1637 - 2012-03-09 13:46:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Danny Husk
    double post
    Amanda Sterling
    Doomheim
    #1638 - 2012-03-09 14:00:12 UTC
    After reading the blog I just felt the urge to do this
    FloppieTheBanjoClown
    Arcana Imperii Ltd.
    #1639 - 2012-03-09 14:24:53 UTC
    What I'm taking away from all of this is that I need to throw out any training plans I have and make sure I have destroyer, battlecruiser, and all racial cruiser skills to 5 JUST TO BE SURE I get the maximum number of free skill points and don't have to waste time training multiple skills later if I want to try out a specific ship.

    THIS is why I'm opposed to this change, as well as my previous post in this thread. CCP is forcing us into a course of action, lest we be penalized with additional training to achieve the same results. This is NOT a good thing.

    Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

    Lee Dalton
    Ministry of War
    Amarr Empire
    #1640 - 2012-03-09 14:36:30 UTC
    Seed the Racial Destroyer and Battlecruiser skills now.