These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: Back to the balancing future!

First post First post
Author
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#561 - 2012-11-07 20:46:39 UTC
All 4 races getting skirmish options on their commands?

Also, it seems kinda lame that the Prophecy is becoming a drone boat. It would be much better suited to follow the Apoc line of range with pulses for less top end damage. Honestly, nobody is going to use it if it can only use 3-4 heavy drones and still be **** with lasers. If you make it Ewar based, then it becomes completely out of whack with the other BC's.

Ferox should get the 5% resist, and range bonus with some slot reconfig and maybe 1 more rail. Steal one of it's 4 lows and add an additional mid slot. And it sorely needs more fittings.

Drake needs to straight up lose the resist bonus in place of something else. I'd say missile velocity would make sense in that line of ships.

Let the ferox be the unique tanker.

Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords
#562 - 2012-11-07 20:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Destriouth Hollow
I like lasers, drones und rockets.
I don't care much for Minmatar though.
But im currently enjoying to fly a Myrmidon and a Drake. I sadly can't really compete with other pvpers yet because of my weak skills. If I don't skill it now i will be stuck on one race......Skilling Battlecruisers to 5 is and will always be a very long skillway. Quadruppling/Trippling this is a thought that strikes fear into my eyes.

Saving 3mio SP on something u want in the longrun is a big deal if u only have arround 4,5mio Skillpoints.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#563 - 2012-11-07 20:47:34 UTC
Harvey James wrote:


Multiple jump clones spring to mind mm...



How is multiple jump clones going to help you run 2 or 3 differnt types of links on the same ship?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#564 - 2012-11-07 20:47:54 UTC
Quote:
I mean, ask yourself, would you like a Damanation fully boosting armor and barely boosting skirmish becuase of the lack of a mindlink affecting the skirmish, or would you rather have a Damnation and a Claymore fully boosting each and which do you think is more likely to happen (you're a smart guy I know you know).


If you have a Damnation and a Claymore pilot already available why would you not utilize them both to the fullest? Your argument makes zero sense.

If you don't have both pilots availabe, you can choose which is more valuable to your fleet and use the appropriately mindlinked clone to fly it... as opposed to not having that option at all.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#565 - 2012-11-07 20:48:52 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Harvey James wrote:


Multiple jump clones spring to mind mm...



How is multiple jump clones going to help you run 2 or 3 differnt types of links on the same ship?

Pick the appropriate clone (and mindlink) for that particular fleet.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#566 - 2012-11-07 20:50:07 UTC
Destriouth Hollow wrote:
Here in contrary its: Don't skill Battlecuiser now and you are an idiot!
It costs you 3 months of skilling!
So? Do you plan to get all four? When you plan to get them, will it make any real difference?

Quote:
If I would have 4 months there wouldn't even be a problem. But its set close after December 4.
Says who?
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#567 - 2012-11-07 20:51:21 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Quote:
I mean, ask yourself, would you like a Damanation fully boosting armor and barely boosting skirmish becuase of the lack of a mindlink affecting the skirmish, or would you rather have a Damnation and a Claymore fully boosting each and which do you think is more likely to happen (you're a smart guy I know you know).


If you have a Damnation and a Claymore pilot already available why would you not utilize them both to the fullest? Your argument makes zero sense.

If you don't have both pilots availabe, you can choose which is more valuable to your fleet and use the appropriately mindlinked clone to fly it... as opposed to not having that option at all.



My argument isn't an argument, its a question directed at the guys making the change, and its fairly simple:

The ships are being redesigned to support multiple links, are the mindlinks going to be altered to follow this or is this intended game design to weaken links across the board on top of the already coming nerf (armor and skirmis boosts for example are going to be weakened on a t3, drastically, coupled with the fact that now some of the bonuses might not be mindlink boosted which means its in effect a double nerf to fully use the ship as designed)

I'm asking if this is on purpose or if its under consideration or if they hadn't thought of it as a consequence

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords
#568 - 2012-11-07 20:53:01 UTC
I plan to fly at least 3 of those races at some point. But currently each day of skilltime is really important to me. i swap arround between my 2 chars on a daily base because there are a few skills i want really badly.
This is just ****** up....
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#569 - 2012-11-07 20:53:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Ranger 1 wrote:

Pick the appropriate clone (and mindlink) for that particular fleet.



By your logic the change is essentially useless then, and will have little to no effect, because in a non shocker thats exactly what you have to do now, so one might wonder whats the point in altering the command ships at all.

Why not leave the fleet comman as single bonus ships and instead of double stacking bonuses give the field commands the alternate bonus instead.

So like the Damnation gets the armor bonus and the Absolution can give a skirmish bonus. The idea of multiple bonuses off one hull seems wasted if they're not going to be fully bonused, eve is full of min maxers, and it seems silly to waste time programing something that simply wont be used.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#570 - 2012-11-07 20:57:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
I'm Down wrote:
All 4 races getting skirmish options on their commands?

Also, it seems kinda lame that the Prophecy is becoming a drone boat. It would be much better suited to follow the Apoc line of range with pulses for less top end damage. Honestly, nobody is going to use it if it can only use 3-4 heavy drones and still be **** with lasers. If you make it Ewar based, then it becomes completely out of whack with the other BC's.

Ferox should get the 5% resist, and range bonus with some slot reconfig and maybe 1 more rail. Steal one of it's 4 lows and add an additional mid slot. And it sorely needs more fittings.

Drake needs to straight up lose the resist bonus in place of something else. I'd say missile velocity would make sense in that line of ships.

Let the ferox be the unique tanker.



Like the drake needs more range ... more dps would be more useful
Prophecy should have a HAM bonus along with the ogres
And Apoc needs to lose it's OP optimal range bonus adds too much range for a weapon system that is already OP for range now maybe if Apoc becomes a droneboat that would not be a bad thing with HAMS also..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Irregessa
Obfuscation and Reflections
#571 - 2012-11-07 21:05:31 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

Pick the appropriate clone (and mindlink) for that particular fleet.



By your logic the change is essentially useless then, and will have little to no effect, because in a non shocker thats exactly what you have to do now, so one might wonder whats the point in altering the command ships at all.

Why not leave the fleet comman as single bonus ships and instead of double stacking bonuses give the field commands the alternate bonus instead.

So like the Damnation gets the armor bonus and the Absolution can give a skirmish bonus. The idea of multiple bonuses off one hull seems wasted if they're not going to be fully bonused, eve is full of min maxers, and it seems silly to waste time programing something that simply wont be used.


I do the multiple jump clone thing, which is all fine and well until you do something like jump into the skirmish clone for a fleet, the fleet fills up, is about to get underway, and then the FC asks if anyone can fly a damnation, because the one we had needed to log off and we can't leave without a damnation...

If the idea is that the you can use the same ship either for boosting one kind of links or boosting another, then this change to the fleet command ships is entirely economic. You aren't getting anything more out of the ship than you would by having two different ships each with one bonus, like we have now. That isn't a good reason to make changes to the ship.

I rather like Grath's idea of splitting the bonuses between the two command ships for the race.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#572 - 2012-11-07 21:09:47 UTC
Irregessa wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:

Pick the appropriate clone (and mindlink) for that particular fleet.



By your logic the change is essentially useless then, and will have little to no effect, because in a non shocker thats exactly what you have to do now, so one might wonder whats the point in altering the command ships at all.

Why not leave the fleet comman as single bonus ships and instead of double stacking bonuses give the field commands the alternate bonus instead.

So like the Damnation gets the armor bonus and the Absolution can give a skirmish bonus. The idea of multiple bonuses off one hull seems wasted if they're not going to be fully bonused, eve is full of min maxers, and it seems silly to waste time programing something that simply wont be used.


I do the multiple jump clone thing, which is all fine and well until you do something like jump into the skirmish clone for a fleet, the fleet fills up, is about to get underway, and then the FC asks if anyone can fly a damnation, because the one we had needed to log off and we can't leave without a damnation...

If the idea is that the you can use the same ship either for boosting one kind of links or boosting another, then this change to the fleet command ships is entirely economic. You aren't getting anything more out of the ship than you would by having two different ships each with one bonus, like we have now. That isn't a good reason to make changes to the ship.

I rather like Grath's idea of splitting the bonuses between the two command ships for the race.

I'm not quite clear on why it's necessary to change the ship with the bonus set. Since the ships are designed to be both offensively capable and bonus givers and both use different weapons systems why lock a single bonus set with a particular weapons system? If the idea is that is is somehow better to force the ship to change with the clone can someone please explain the advantage there?
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
#573 - 2012-11-07 21:11:19 UTC
Destriouth Hollow wrote:
If I would have 4 months there wouldn't even be a problem. But its set close after December 4.
Thats hardly a month and really forcing it.
1,5 months of training Battlecruiser/Destroyer is half of my current time in EVE.....


Oh lord.

You do have at least four months. This is not happening in Retribution:

Quote:
let’s take a peek into what we want to start tweaking next year.


plus

Quote:
battlecruisers are indeed next to get through the tiericide revolution


plus

Quote:
skill requirements will be modified when we are done overhauling tech1 battlecruisers and battleships.


equals: it's not happening all that soon. It's happening when the battlecruiser changes are rolled out. Fear not. You have some planning time. I promise that you will appreciate the love and kittens out of Battlecruiser V, though.

To save you some hunting through the thread for this, here is what you need for maximum reward:

Every racial frigate to IV
Every racial cruiser to III
Destroyers V
Battlecruisers V

This will give you all of the new skills at V. The racial frigate to IV is only because you need it to inject the cruiser skills. If you only care about destroyers, you only need all of the frigates to III. The reason this works is that gives you the ability, pre-patch, to sit in every T1 destroyer and T1 battlecruiser in the game. That's all you need to get V in all of the new skills.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#574 - 2012-11-07 21:13:57 UTC
Irregessa wrote:


I rather like Grath's idea of splitting the bonuses between the two command ships for the race.



I'm just trying to get my head around it, it feels like they want to get the gallent Command ships out on the field and I back that idea, but why would you bother with unbonused information warfare links since they're not that strong, and as a command ship you'd probably obviously go with the bonus on armored warfare instead.

CCP fozzie joked that 7 people have trained for an Eos, this change, while helpful to those 7 people doesn't feel like it would get more people into an Eos unless they changed the midnlinks to affect multiple link types.

I do understand the jump clones thing, I mean we have the money to rip out the implants and press in new ones whenever we want, its not really about the cost as much as the functionality and what the players are more likely to do with the bonuses, coupled with the idea behind the changes in general.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#575 - 2012-11-07 21:24:34 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Irregessa wrote:


I rather like Grath's idea of splitting the bonuses between the two command ships for the race.



I'm just trying to get my head around it, it feels like they want to get the gallent Command ships out on the field and I back that idea, but why would you bother with unbonused information warfare links since they're not that strong, and as a command ship you'd probably obviously go with the bonus on armored warfare instead.

CCP fozzie joked that 7 people have trained for an Eos, this change, while helpful to those 7 people doesn't feel like it would get more people into an Eos unless they changed the midnlinks to affect multiple link types.

I do understand the jump clones thing, I mean we have the money to rip out the implants and press in new ones whenever we want, its not really about the cost as much as the functionality and what the players are more likely to do with the bonuses, coupled with the idea behind the changes in general.

I'm not really seeing the advantage of separating bonuses. As the plan stands one can simply change clones and links and you have a new fully bonused set of links without changing ships while also having a choice of weapons systems which will be more relevant if/when the changes come that force boosters to be on grid.
Blubsia
Doomheim
#576 - 2012-11-07 21:30:59 UTC
What about our red-headed stepchildren, HACs Question

Ever since 2006 less than a handful are worth the pricetag....and in limited set-ups
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#577 - 2012-11-07 21:31:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

I'm not really seeing the advantage of separating bonuses. As the plan stands one can simply change clones and links and you have a new fully bonused set of links without changing ships while also having a choice of weapons systems which will be more relevant if/when the changes come that force boosters to be on grid.


Ok, ask yourself this: Not many trained for an Eos (CCPs own words not mine), CCP are making a drive to get people into hulls that aren't used, after this change, what motivates you to train for the commanship (Eos)nobody uses now when a Damnation can do the same thing?

EDIT: It feels like the idea of haviing multiple bonuses was to make the ships more attractive to use, like the Eos could run a mixture of Info and Armor links, thus people MIGHT start fielding them in fleets, but if you must still pick only a single set, then of course you'd pick the armor set, and the Damnation would be the preffered choice because of its more robust tank if it needs to be on grid.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#578 - 2012-11-07 21:33:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Forlorn Wongraven
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I'm not really seeing the advantage of separating bonuses. As the plan stands one can simply change clones and links and you have a new fully bonused set of links without changing ships while also having a choice of weapons systems which will be more relevant if/when the changes come that force boosters to be on grid.


With the racial mindlink you only boost the racial warware link. So let's assume you have an armored mindlink and put two armor warfare mod and one skirmish warfare mod on your Damnation: only the armor warfare mods get their 50% boost from the 50 to 250 mil mindlink implant (depending on the type).

Winner ATXI , 3rd place ATXII, winner ATXIII, 2nd ATXIV - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW

Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#579 - 2012-11-07 21:39:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Il Feytid
What your edit said Grath.
Forlorn Wongraven
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#580 - 2012-11-07 21:43:02 UTC
Pretty much all CS need a serious overhaul anyway and with the proposed changes we might get a 100% damage bonus per weapon slot like Marauders have, so we end up with 4x weapon and 3x warfare slots in the end which will make fitting alot easier on the Eos.

Winner ATXI , 3rd place ATXII, winner ATXIII, 2nd ATXIV - follow me on twitter: @ForlornW