These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Grath Telkin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#981 - 2013-02-12 05:11:29 UTC
All t1 ships first, then t2, then caps was the order they said.

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

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#982 - 2013-02-15 12:46:48 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
Mund Richard wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
1) Clone upgrade issues after patch where players who had the correct clone will no longer have them. This will particularly affect pilots who logged in space or far away from cloning facilities.

Well, now that we know it will happen right as the spring/summer expansion hits, at least you can prepare for that.

Still a hassle, thanks for pointing it out.


It's not a hassle, it's a recipe for disaster
People will complain about anything. Your problem seems to be that being given free skill points might make you lose skill points. Well if you're so picky about maintaining your character at a specific skillset, then update your clone.

I still think characters should be able to refund their skillpoints for something tangible in-game like ISK, I mean if you really want to get rid of em. I'm keeping mine, thanks. Though I'm also slightly concerned about how each skillpoint costs more on the medclone than the last. But it's a minor issue unless you spend too much time skilling up and not enough time playing the game. Most of us can afford our med clones because we either learn to make a lot of money or just not die so often.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

RichtPaul
Shadow Industries I
#983 - 2013-02-18 05:15:56 UTC  |  Edited by: RichtPaul
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
People will complain about anything. Your problem seems to be that being given free skill points might make you lose skill points. Well if you're so picky about maintaining your character at a specific skillset, then update your clone.

I still think characters should be able to refund their skillpoints for something tangible in-game like ISK, I mean if you really want to get rid of em. I'm keeping mine, thanks. Though I'm also slightly concerned about how each skillpoint costs more on the medclone than the last. But it's a minor issue unless you spend too much time skilling up and not enough time playing the game. Most of us can afford our med clones because we either learn to make a lot of money or just not die so often.


What.

Refund skill points for isk?
Alexa Smart
Superon Inc
#984 - 2013-02-22 22:22:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexa Smart
The fleet booster has to be on grid? boooh! On one side the overall boosting goes down the drain thanks to your nerf-nerf! On the other side I would have to invest time and money on skills and a ship that is going to be primary target from the beginning of the battle. Yeah, maybe if you allow boosting while cloaked!

Focus on expanding the game, not nerfing! Ships and skills are fine as they are. A little imbalance is good, so people who learn the game can have an advantage and have more fun. It makes no difference to ignorant or noob players.

Can you tell me what is the strategy behind all this nerfing and changes? I suspect it's greed.

Don't tell me that I should quit EVE cause my answer fill be FO.
Grath Telkin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#985 - 2013-02-23 14:53:51 UTC
Alexa Smart wrote:


Can you tell me what is the strategy behind all this nerfing and changes? I suspect it's greed.

.


Off grid boosters aren't you 'learning the game' for an advantage, its having a virtually untouchable advantage (because in small gang and solo situations the other small gang/guy doesn't have the chance to scan down your booster).

Thinking that training an off grid booster is somehow knowledge or skill related is pretty funny though. It would have been if you were say, the guy who came up with hard to probe off grid boosters, but doing the guy that just got his trained up 6 months ago doesn't make you that.

Its an in game advantage that is very hard in most situations to disrupt, thats what makes it broken.


And eventually they fully intend to take it out. Nothing will change that.

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

Alexa Smart
Superon Inc
#986 - 2013-02-23 22:22:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexa Smart
Grath Telkin wrote:
Alexa Smart wrote:


Can you tell me what is the strategy behind all this nerfing and changes? I suspect it's greed.

.


Off grid boosters aren't you 'learning the game' for an advantage, its having a virtually untouchable advantage (because in small gang and solo situations the other small gang/guy doesn't have the chance to scan down your booster).

Thinking that training an off grid booster is somehow knowledge or skill related is pretty funny though. It would have been if you were say, the guy who came up with hard to probe off grid boosters, but doing the guy that just got his trained up 6 months ago doesn't make you that.

Its an in game advantage that is very hard in most situations to disrupt, thats what makes it broken.


And eventually they fully intend to take it out. Nothing will change that.


Your comment is pretty much an inconsiderate statement due to the following:

1. I need a dedicated account or dedicated player for boosting

2. I have to invest 1 year to train a toon to do proper leadership and this cost subscription money, skill books as well as "maybe" a 1b Loki like mine

In view of the above I think your and CCP's point is very light, bordering ignorance and I would say I am quite annoyed by this.

Why not instead disallow the booster from being stationed in a POS? that way it can be scanned and you can warp to it.
Grath Telkin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#987 - 2013-02-24 07:32:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Alexa Smart wrote:
1. I need a dedicated account or dedicated player for boosting


So? Lots of things in EVE require a fairly dedicated alt or account to deal with, whats your point?


Alexa Smart wrote:
2. I have to invest 1 year to train a toon to do proper leadership and this cost subscription money, skill books as well as "maybe" a 1b Loki like mine


Let me introduce you to my Titan, it took 3 years to get right, 100 billion isk for the hull, 5 billion isk for the skillbook, a dedicated alt AND account because I can't get him out, and the same leadership skills as your alt.

Are we to assume that he should be nigh on invincible as well as providing a completely untouchable bonus?

The answer is no, we shouldn't, because its bad game design to let a player have a benefit that can't be taken by another player.


Alexa Smart wrote:
In view of the above I think your and CCP's point is very light, bordering ignorance and I would say I am quite annoyed by this.


Glad I could help.

Alexa Smart wrote:
Why not instead disallow the booster from being stationed in a POS? that way it can be scanned and you can warp to it.


Because as was stated, even if your alt was OUTSIDE of a POS, most engagements you use it in are over in a relatively short period of time, and small gangs and solo guys don't have the chance in those situations to actually probe you down. In solo, you're engaged with the guy, he's not going to drop probes and start looking for you, and likewise in small gang situations the man power and time simply isn't there to hunt the alt down even if it WAS outside of a POS.

In fleet warfare they are very often probed down and killed when not in a tower.


You seem to feel that spending money should give you some pass to be untouchable in some way, sorry to tell you thats just not EVE.

Cross train your loki to a falcon and get better at dual boxing, OR learn to dual box your booster and your combat ship on the same grid, regardless, change is coming so you might as well swallow that pill now.

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

Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#988 - 2013-02-27 15:19:12 UTC
Make gang links work in a similar fasion to cyno's / siege modules.

Navigations systems can lock onto the extreme subspace outputs of these modules like cyno beacons and warp to them.
Warp drives divert power to Gang links while active in order to supply adequate power.

90s cycle time.

Can not be activated within 500km of active force fields.
Can not warp ship while module is active.


Off grid boosting is now possible but also certain death if not protected.


no need for jiggy ongrid only mecahnics.
Dav Varan
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#989 - 2013-02-27 16:35:45 UTC
On the topic of the dual bonused ships.

Gal are the speed freaks of the armor world , it would make more sense for there racial progression to have the skirmish bonuses instead of Amarr.

Gal Armor/Skirmish
Amarr Armor/Information.


Siege and Armor bonuses are nice and even.

However

Skirmish is massivelly more useful than infomation.
For balance Skirmish needs nerfing and Information needs boosting.

I recommend moving point and web range bonuses from skirmish to information.
Belona Force
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#990 - 2013-03-02 03:12:09 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
ReK42 wrote:

It's still a nerf to the boost itself and, in the context of everyone talking about removing off-grid boosting, it should not be taken lightly. Please don't CCP this and nerf a very important mechanic from both ends.

So I want to make clear that we don't have a timeline for when pushing links ongrid will be possible. It won't be happening at the same time as these other listed changes.


Harvey James wrote:

An AOE range would be the way too go and make all CS brawlers


However, let's throw a brainstorming concept out here just for fun: What if gang links worked a lot like warp disruption spheres? Smile



I can see how the boost would seem overpowered in large numbers. But for those of us that choose not to be part of big Corporations and like to play the game the way we want to and not the way others want us to. I would like to put this out for brain storming concept.Idea

Boost would stay the same as long as the numbers of the group stay at 5and under then 6 to 10 it would lose a percentage and so on. Giving small gangs or corporations an edge to compete with larger gangs and Corporations, Off-grid boosting is no longer a problem and miners and solo players can keep playing the game.

So instead of stabbing and twisting the knife of death in the miners and solo players, try just trimming the fat.Smile
Nijiho
Galactica Industrial Facilities
#991 - 2013-03-05 17:07:10 UTC
Remove the boost, that's it. Enought of all this bullshit.
Seolfor
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#992 - 2013-04-02 06:15:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Seolfor
So any update where the internal thought process is on the following issues:

1. Command Ship rebalance (as pure combat boats, as T2 BCs - youve hinted faction BCs for the summer Xpack, so i hope to god that you will first balance the existing 8 T2 BCs before adding another 4 Faction BCs and make the distinction between the existing Combat BCs, Command Ships, Faction BCs and Rebalanced BSs even harder)

Im guessing next in line are the BSs, now that youve announced faction cruisers rebalance, just wish to know if the T2 BCs will be rebalanced for the summer x-pack or not

2. Supreme effect of mindlinks. Youve said you dont like 5% (25%) on T3s, but this 50% is where the retardedness comes in. Sample math of skirmish links - with all 5s, mindlinks on a Loki, its 52% v/s 42% on an unbonused (but All5s, mindlink) T3, say Tengu.

So on a 24km point, with a 25% bonused ship youre adding 12+km (~36km point) while via an unbonused ship its still a 34km point.

The problem isnt the T3 5% bonus (and hence the 'nerf' from 25% to 10% on T3s is near moot), its the 50% Mindlink.

3. Plain inferiority of Information Links - may be a connected problem of how unbonused EWAR is still very effective, addressing both can lead to attractive Information Links.

E.g. Make unbonused TDs half as good, double the bonus on specialist hulls. Makes the specialist hulls just as effective as they are today (or slightly better). Makes unbonused EWAR mod usage much more subtle. AND makes the effect of Information links that much more pronounced, since the base EWAR on unbonused ships will benefit far more from the links.

4. OGB - smart money says, youre no closer to an answer than you were in Nov '12. Please update?
Alsyth
#993 - 2013-04-02 14:50:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Alsyth
Updates please?

And it will require a boost for the ganglink sub of T3s, atm it's very bad compared to tank-based subsystems, and never used outside of POSes/offgrid boost because of that.
Ryuce
#994 - 2013-04-26 06:00:38 UTC
Bump

Update please.
Aplier Shivra
#995 - 2013-05-02 05:38:49 UTC
Just another bump from someone looking for an update on the command ships part.

Even just to say whether or not the ship changes can be expected with the release of Odyssey, considering that the skill changes will be happening then.

Any tidbit of information would be helpful, thanks! =)
Jason Dunham
Andvaranaut Conglomerate
#996 - 2013-05-08 18:05:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jason Dunham
I'm interested in an update to this as well since fanfest has happened. A corpmate had an idea for the command ship boosts that I thought was interesting, he's a orca, command ship, and titan pilot, so he has some experience in this area.

The problem here is really a difference in how we're using the boosts, so some feedback on what CCP wants to do with the different uses of the boost would be helpful. Example: Do they have problems with a Rorqual boosting miners from a POS in nullsec or a wh? Does CCP not like a mission or incursion fleet having an offgrid booster? Or is the only problem having offgrid un-touchable boosts in PVP? If it's only the offgrid boosts in PVP, then perhaps you could tie in the offgrid boost with the safety selection. If you have your safeties on you can get offgrid boosts, but if you turn them off the booster has to be on-grid.

I want to be clear. I do believe that pvp boosts should be on-grid. However in PVE and mining I don't think that will work as intended. I also don't think it's unbalanced to have that setup work in PVE and mining, because there's a lot of options to get those boosts (t1 battlecruisers, t3's, and command ships) all with varying costs and effectiveness.

As a side note, it looks to me that most of the changes to ship balancing are being done with a pvp viewpoint. I think some caution should be exercised so that you don't remove a segment of the gameplay choices from the game. I'm happy with most of the changes made so far, I like that there are more choices for ship choices for fleet building, and I look forward to what you guys will do in the future.

Thanks for your time,

Jason Dunham
Astarte Bellatrix
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#997 - 2013-05-14 16:09:38 UTC
Question on partially trainined skills. If I have BC V trained to say 90% when the BC skill is psplit, will I lose those skill points? Or will they be applied somewhere?
Gallion
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#998 - 2013-05-15 11:11:11 UTC
thought on the Boost from POS detail, perhaps see to giving the links a Range of 400km? i personally rather be Boosting fleets within a fleets range rather then being hidden away. A Tech3 should be able to fight on par with normal/Tech2 fairly well fitted with 3guns. if its in a fleet anyway the justification lands on the FC's priority ability. To be honest FC's should be the ones in the T2:CS or T3:SC in the first place as its very fitting of such roles in the first place.

This is a Signature, It makes people Stare. (Man I gotta Make one , or Find one to steal)

Daisai
Daisai Investments.
#999 - 2013-06-12 17:30:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Daisai
Got a few questions about this "dev blog" after the patch.

In the blog blog there the following "Armageddon: this ship is performing well at the time being, and thus we have little reason to alter it."
It seems that you changed your mind that fast from not changing a ship to a complete change to a ship.

This brings me to my next question which is about the command ships.

Since the things we can read in the blog can be completely different to what ccp decide to do in a very short notice, is this then the same for the command ships?
In the blog you said you will make command ships the better fleet booster compared to tech 3, however after the expansion that did not change.
You did however did change the skill requirement for the command ships.

So is this change still going to happen or did ccp decide to do a full 180
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal ISD Ezwal does not know what a insult it is seems.
, like you did with the armageddon?



Edit:

Going by the way ccp decides to ignore a simple question its save to assume they have decided to avoid answering questions regarding command ship bonuses.
Making these dev blogs pretty useless if you refuse to answer questions about them or give info on the state of them after a major patch has been released.




Funny how you decide to edit a post but dont even bother to answer questions asked by several people.

Also when someone says something like "you did bla bla like a chick on pms" it is not a insult saying that you are a chick on pms it is comparing your action to that compared to someone else with a bit of humor.