These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
vedaire LegendKiller Carthin
Intergalactic Exploration and Expeditions
#781 - 2012-11-09 18:22:50 UTC
Personally I think its time you leave ships alone and focus on other aspects we worked hard to get to the ships we are able to fly and im tired of seeing you takking all the work out of it for new players. also we chose the ships based on what they can do now you wanna take that away as well think you need to focus on pr rather then screwwing us over.

Grath Telkin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#782 - 2012-11-09 18:26:33 UTC
vedaire LegendKiller Carthin wrote:
Personally I think its time you leave ships alone and focus on other aspects we worked hard to get to the ships we are able to fly and im tired of seeing you takking all the work out of it for new players. also we chose the ships based on what they can do now you wanna take that away as well think you need to focus on pr rather then screwwing us over.


Gona post what every dev who read this is thinking right now:

what the hell does this even mean?

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

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#783 - 2012-11-09 18:27:30 UTC
Tzel Mayon wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Caldari Battlecruiser V, and Minmatar Battlecruiser V


Hello ... Someone else asked the same exact question I am about to ask, on this thread about this topic... but it has been unanswered by CCP:

In the future will Faction Cruiser IV, (or Faction Cruiser III), be required for faction Battlecruiser I, and if so, will people automatically be given Faction Cruiser IV, if they already have Faction Cruiser III, and Battlecruisers I?

If this is the case, will people who have Faction Cruiser IV and Battlecruisers I be reimbursed for this training time, since other people will be getting it for free??

Thanks!!!


In the future, racial cruiser LvL 4 will be the prerequisite for racial BC.
If you currently have BC V, and racial cruiser III, you will be given racial BC V. You will NOT be given racial cruiser IV..... so no reimbursements are needed.

Besides, if you have BC V, Dessie V, and all racial cruisers to III (<- this last one takes very little time), then you turn 2m sp in to 8m sp.... I don't think anyone is "owed" more sp.... if anything, ccp is being FAR TOO GENEROUS dishing the sp out!
Red lensman
BlackSky inc.
#784 - 2012-11-09 18:32:25 UTC
if you make gang boosts need to be on grid you'll nerf mining boosts for all but 3-8 man fleets as 3-4 exhumers can clear a belt in less than a hour so a fleet of 8+ really needs to be in 2+ belts
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#785 - 2012-11-09 18:34:59 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
vedaire LegendKiller Carthin wrote:
Personally I think its time you leave ships alone and focus on other aspects we worked hard to get to the ships we are able to fly and im tired of seeing you takking all the work out of it for new players. also we chose the ships based on what they can do now you wanna take that away as well think you need to focus on pr rather then screwwing us over.


Gona post what every dev who read this is thinking right now:

what the hell does this even mean?


It means Grath is complaining that his favorite ship wont' be the same after it's rebalanced.... and, even if this creates several viable alternatives, he doesn't want to use a different ship or different fit because what he has now works.

He's just resistant to change, even when change is to the general good....



Isk Machine
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#786 - 2012-11-09 18:43:52 UTC
If i train BC to V and its completed a few hours after the changes on dec. 4th, will i lose all the accumulated skill points?
Qaidan Alenko
Eezo-Lution Inc.
#787 - 2012-11-09 18:51:55 UTC
Isk Machine wrote:
If i train BC to V and its completed a few hours after the changes on dec. 4th, will i lose all the accumulated skill points?

No.. because these changes are for after the Retribution expansion comes out... i.e. Spring expansion
Go ahead... Get your Wham on!!!
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#788 - 2012-11-09 18:52:40 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Besides, if you have BC V, Dessie V, and all racial cruisers to III (<- this last one takes very little time), then you turn 2m sp in to 8m sp.... I don't think anyone is "owed" more sp.... if anything, ccp is being FAR TOO GENEROUS dishing the sp out!

There's nothing generous about it because there's nothing inherently beneficial about having more SP as far as game mechanics are concerned. All it does is contribute to a higher clone cost under the current system.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#789 - 2012-11-09 20:06:13 UTC
Wow 40 pages!!!! this is a TLDR millestone.

I just hope that someone from CCP, make a POS REVAMP before I stop playing eve due to the increase price of the plex....
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#790 - 2012-11-09 20:20:50 UTC  |  Edited by: MIrple
With the coming changes could we possible get the 2nd command ship to use the tier 2 skin IE Drake, Myrm, Harby, Cane. It would make sense with the Nighthawk having missiles and the EOS having Drones. Just my 2 cents\

Also A way to make it so that Gall or Amarr pilots don't miss out would be to give different bonuses to the ships lets use Gall and Mimmy for this. So the Astarte would have Siege/Info and the EOS would be Armor/Info. The Slepnier could be Armor/Skirmish and the Claymore could be Siege/Skirmish. Would add variety and also not make one race inherently weak in doing so.
Ribikoka
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#791 - 2012-11-09 21:09:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Ribikoka
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Ribikoka wrote:
Drakes with 2x shield extenders +3x CDFE rigs has ~21400 shield (fitteable to HAM) 96.5K EHP


Your Drake is overtanked. If you really want to compare that to something compare it to dual plate Prophecy.

Replace one of the LSEs with something more useful like a target painter.



Thts why the null fleets use Prophecy ? Oh wait, they using drake. :P
And the prophecy has 240 HP/sec passive shield recharge ??? No. The main problem is the Drake resist bonuses with recharge rate and the big shield HP which hp more than 20% bigger than any BC hp.
And no, the Drake with 2x shield extender is not overtanked. And why i need remove one LSE to compare other ship when thats a normal null sec fleet setup? Easily can fit 2 extender with mwd + scrambler etc.
eVRiAL
Origin.
Black Legion...
#792 - 2012-11-09 21:37:23 UTC  |  Edited by: eVRiAL
Didn't read 40 pages.

@CCP: totally agree with all except rebalancing Command ships. It's just meaningless and makes no logic at all. Caldari don't use projectiles, Minmatar don't use lasers, WHY WOULD they get warfare bonuses at foreign technologies?

In short term, is a good idea to give CS 4-5% and T3 3% link bonus.
In long term, it's not as easy, because there is a such thing as Titans, that have specific bonus up to 37.5% on his own race, and they can't much walk around between gates or systems.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#793 - 2012-11-09 22:01:40 UTC
eVRiAL wrote:
Didn't read 40 pages.

@CCP: totally agree with all except rebalancing Command ships. It's just meaningless and makes no logic at all. Caldari don't use projectiles, Minmatar don't use lasers, WHY WOULD they get warfare bonuses at foreign technologies?

In short term, is a good idea to give CS 4-5% and T3 3% link bonus.
In long term, it's not as easy, because there is a such thing as Titans, that have specific bonus up to 37.5% on his own race, and they can't much walk around between gates or systems.

Shields are hardly a foreign technology to the Minmatar, so it make sense that the would attempt to create some enhancements to the efficiency of their shields.
Velarra
#794 - 2012-11-09 22:07:53 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
I have a question about the Megathron.

Since it was said that the Megathron should be more mobile / agile. Will the Vindicator then get the aditional boost in agility (like it have now over the current Megathron) over the new Megathron stats then?

Will the Vindicator be even more agile then?

Or will this only affect the normal battleships?

Quoting myself so i can get an answer on this.


We're going to get the T1 hulls done first then work on making sure all the faction ships are good to go.


So what are the odds of changing Pirate faction ship skill requirements to be a touch more focused/specialized? Instead of their current dual-racial requirements?

eg. [Pirate Faction] Frigate, [Pirate Faction] Cruiser, [Pirate Faction] Battleship, [Pirate Faction] Carrier

(Alongside suitably fair SP/time investment related balancing/tweaks/changes if necessary for those with the current skills to fly them).

Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#795 - 2012-11-09 22:50:57 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Pattern Clarc wrote:
Your current plan for the Ferox is doomed. Short range shield brawlling is the key here.

Brutix should have a utiliy high and active armour tanking bonuses should diaf. Otherwise, please proceed.


This. With the loss of 5% shield bonus, Caldari won't have a close range battlecruiser anymore, the drake is already used at medium range in most fits and is also losing its tanking bonuses.

This will leave T2 Cruisers, T3 SC and Battleships as the only realistic option for use at close range with logistics.



I'd much rather see the brutix as well as the astarte retain a buffed 10% per level active bonus instead of just copy pasting bonuses seen on almost all other ships. IMO this "role" system is normalizing ships far far far too much between classes and in the end is just removing variation. I'd rather see active tanking fixed instead of just turning every ship into another copy paste fleet ship.

They're doing this because active armor tanking is lacking. Having a rep bonus fails when you're being alpha'd. Simply put, buffer tanks work better in almost every way.

I don't think the answer is just doing away with active tanking modules. I think they need to be balanced. For example, the cap usages and fittings need to be more reasonable between shield and armor. There's no way I can possibly fit a large repper on an active ship, but yet XLASBs are easily fit on ships with very little gimping as a result of fitting it. To fit a large armor rep, you'd need something above 150% of the power grid of a Myrm, for example.

If they're going to push for buffer tanking setups, then resist bonuses aren't the only way to go about it--remember they can buff hull or armor hp, give ships a armor amount bonus, or a combination of the two.

I personally would like to see armor tanking fixed by making the cap usage significantly less than it is now and allow the use of large reppers on medium ships or just increase fitting on LASBs+ so medium ships can't tank ridiculous amounts.

And while they're at it--take out the damn skillbook for the RAH and incorporate the bonses into the module. It's dumb that I have to learn a skill to improve the RAH (especailly the cap reduction coming in Retri) while there's no similar skill for ASBs. How is that balanced??

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Sassums
Repo Industries
#796 - 2012-11-09 23:47:31 UTC
It seems that this updates and "balancing" are more "nerfs" than anything else.

I understand the hows and the why's, but it is slightly annoying.

Some questions:

When will we see updates to POS permissions and Corporation Permissions.

The system currently, is just plan pathetic, sorry to be so blunt, but it is.

Corporations simply do not have the control or security they need, especially for those of us in WH space.

If I want to assign a player to one hanger, one tab I should be able to. With the current set up you cannot do that.

We need more levels of permissions, if I want someone to be able to online/offline hangers but not the main POS, I should be able to.

When will these incredibly urgent and important updates come our way?
YuuKnow
The Scope
#797 - 2012-11-10 00:29:59 UTC
You left out Black Op battleships and where you think they fit in the grand scheme of the Bships.

yk
Ciba Lexlulu
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
#798 - 2012-11-10 02:46:20 UTC
I have question regarding skill training for Command Ship, ie, Combat Command vs. Fleet Command. Currently the two command ships require a slightly different skills. How would you handle the skill difference after there is no differentiation between these two ships? If currently I can fly Absolution, can I use Damnation post the skilling changes?

Sorry if this has been answered before, I cannot find this topic in the previous posts nor in CCP devblogs.
Nemesis Bosseret
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#799 - 2012-11-10 02:49:26 UTC
Lord Eremet wrote:
My view of the proposed changes:


*Prophecy - Don't make it a Amarr Myrmidon, thats just silly. Make it a 'Abaddon'-like BC instead.

*Ferox - Make it a brawler, with one extra mid. Nobody uses it as a sniper now that we have Naga.

*Brutix - Fix armor tanking and you might fix the Brutix at the same time. Add one more low slot.

*Cyclone - Probably fine as is. But I'm interested in ideas.


*Harbinger - a bit more grid/cpu maybe, otherwise fine as is.

*Drake - Remove shield resistance boni and even the field for the other bc's. Controversial, I know.

*Myrmidon - See 'Brutix. Otherwise fine, I think. But don't nerf shieldregen Twisted

*Hurricane - OP bc that should have its powergrid reduced a bit. No more dual-neut shield setup and 425MM guns.


i agree with this, actually i cant even nit pick at it Prophecy i totally agree that drone boat idea is just straight up dumb, ferox would be an awsome brawler hell make that one a drone boat since caldari seem to be lacking heavily on that. Harb slight increase on CPU and Grid, drake dont remove the reis but limit them, Myrm... meh .... its good as is, hurricane maybe not kill the powergrid but make it so you have to use an implant to achivie the dual neuts with 425s...
Ribikoka
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#800 - 2012-11-10 07:40:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Ribikoka
Nemesis Bosseret wrote:
Lord Eremet wrote:
My view of the proposed changes:


*Prophecy - Don't make it a Amarr Myrmidon, thats just silly. Make it a 'Abaddon'-like BC instead.

*Ferox - Make it a brawler, with one extra mid. Nobody uses it as a sniper now that we have Naga.

*Brutix - Fix armor tanking and you might fix the Brutix at the same time. Add one more low slot.

*Cyclone - Probably fine as is. But I'm interested in ideas.


*Harbinger - a bit more grid/cpu maybe, otherwise fine as is.

*Drake - Remove shield resistance boni and even the field for the other bc's. Controversial, I know.

*Myrmidon - See 'Brutix. Otherwise fine, I think. But don't nerf shieldregen Twisted

*Hurricane - OP bc that should have its powergrid reduced a bit. No more dual-neut shield setup and 425MM guns.


i agree with this, actually i cant even nit pick at it Prophecy i totally agree that drone boat idea is just straight up dumb, ferox would be an awsome brawler hell make that one a drone boat since caldari seem to be lacking heavily on that. Harb slight increase on CPU and Grid, drake dont remove the reis but limit them, Myrm... meh .... its good as is, hurricane maybe not kill the powergrid but make it so you have to use an implant to achivie the dual neuts with 425s...


Almost totally agree!!

Prophecy drone boat idea it's a fail develoment idea. Would be much better if CCP dont want to change prophecy resist bonuses to drone bonuses. Optimal bonuses/lvl much better idea.

Drake the most problematic BC in eve. IMHO their hull structure is the main problem, not the missile range.
Atleast 20% bigger HP than other BC and shield extenders easier fitteable than 1600mm plates. (500PG vs 150 pg)
Shield passive regeneration without any shield booster or active repairer 77.3 HP/sec (696HP until 9 seconds), which is better than 2x t2 medium armor repairing (2x320HP/9sec). (standard CFC drake fleet data)
Fully passive drake for high sec PVE itting has, incredible passive shield recharge which is more 2.5x better than any armored BC setup with 2x medium repairer without capacitor!!! (232.5HP/sec) Just remember 2x med armor t2 repairer can heal 2x320HP/9 sec.
It's insane.

Huricane is the second best boat, not need buff or any changes.
Cyclone almost fine, but need some CPU.

Ferox without resist bonuses wont be a popular ship, no matter how many DPS bonuses will be get.
At least 3-4 mid slot need wasting for utility modules like scrambler,resistes,mwd etc. Without resists a short range brawler ship will be just still left behind such a paper tiger.
Need another idea too, for a good balance or the pilots will be using the other blaster boats. (Plus they need more speeds as the other blaster boats)

Brutix almost fine. They have good firepower (756dps with electrons without overheat), but need more speed. The main problem in Eve most of blaster brawler ships slow like a brick.
They are lost their firepower advantages because they cant reach their targets enough fast.
They need more agilities and speed, but not just Brutix, the all blaster ships, because in the past CCP buffed the AC falloff ranges and the Scorch add too much ranges for amarrian ships while they decreasing the ship speeds.

Myrmidon. Nice drone ship. The 5 ogre was much better in the past :P But that's i think would be too overpowered again.
But need drone revisions. The ship is versatile. Easily fitteable to shield or armor tanks. (but that's true so many pilots use Autocannons on them instead hybrid guns)
After all i think, the ship hull build is good. Their problem is the drones. Drones need revision.

Harbinger need just a little cosmetic changes. A little CPU and PG buff, not need anything else.