These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
DeltaPhalanx
Hordes Of Belial
#141 - 2012-11-06 17:05:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
DeltaPhalanx wrote:
Will the changes to Gang Link bonuses be made "Role Bonues" or will the second gang link bonus supplant the existing second bonus for the Command Ships skill? Ie, would the Vulture's second Hybrid Optimal Range bonus become the 3% to Info War link bonus?

To clarify, each command ship has four bonuses based on Command Ships skill level; will the bonuses to links become native to the hull, plus having four bonuses, or will we have two bonuses and two gang link bonuses?


Very likely they will become role bonuses. Once we're done we intend all 8 command ships to be useful for blowing stuff up and all 8 command ships to be useful for gang boosting.


Thank you Fozzie; looking forward to combat-oriented command ships Big smile
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#142 - 2012-11-06 17:06:42 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
CCP Fozzie,

Is there any plans to completely change information links to something more useful? Currently shield, armor and speed links help every ship. 99% of the time players will choose one of those three over information bonuses every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The current fleet hierarchy only sees real use of bonuses in the fleet and wing command spots. Which is tank and skirmish. Would changing the info bonuses to be bonuses to drones, which 90% of all ships in the game have, be an option?

Also I am one of the 7 with max information bonuses on T3 and command ships. Blink


I trained max information warfare skills specifically for one Info Claymore fit for the AT. And then joined CCP before ever actually flying that ship on TQ.

Oops

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#143 - 2012-11-06 17:07:34 UTC
DeltaPhalanx wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
DeltaPhalanx wrote:
Will the changes to Gang Link bonuses be made "Role Bonues" or will the second gang link bonus supplant the existing second bonus for the Command Ships skill? Ie, would the Vulture's second Hybrid Optimal Range bonus become the 3% to Info War link bonus?

To clarify, each command ship has four bonuses based on Command Ships skill level; will the bonuses to links become native to the hull, plus having four bonuses, or will we have two bonuses and two gang link bonuses?


Very likely they will become role bonuses. Once we're done we intend all 8 command ships to be useful for blowing stuff up and all 8 command ships to be useful for gang boosting.


Thank you Fozzie; looking forward to combat-oriented command ships Big smile


Particularly the Eos with proper drone bonuses would be nice instead of its ***** drone bay only bonus hopefully it will get a full set of ogres too

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

Ming Tso
Perkone
Caldari State
#144 - 2012-11-06 17:07:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Ming Tso
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Intaki Kauyon wrote:
CCP: Would like a more clear representation of the BC/Destroyer skill changes.

Quote:
Reimbursement details:
•Let us repeat again: if you could fly it before, you will be able to do so after the change. Technically it means if you are able to fly an Oracle by having Amarr Cruisers 3 and Battlecruisers 3, we will remove the Battlecruisers skill from your character and give you Amarr Battlecruisers at 3. If you had Battlecruisers at 3 and Caldari Cruisers 3 instead, you would not receive Amarr Battlecruisers but the Caldari Battlecruisers skill at 3 instead. The same principle work with the Destroyers skill.
• With the way nested skill requirements work in EVE, it also means that you will still be able to fly an Apocalypse even if you don’t have the Amarr Battlecruiser skill trained at 4 after the change. It won’t matter as long as you have the Amarr Battleship skill at the proper level.

With this in mind, it becomes quite obvious to focus on training the Destroyers and Battlecruisers skills before the change to get the maximum return effect. We highly recommend you start doing so now.


That's all fine and well. But while you are warning us on what to train now, please help us understand the change. You talk about BC skills translating based on the race you own via Cruiser or Frigates, but you don't say how that translates based on reverse. For instance:

If I have currently:

BC to V
Gall Cruiser to V
but Caldari Cruiser to IV

Do I get each one of the 4 BC new skills to V just becuase of current BC is V, or do I get:

Gall BC to V
but
Caldari BC to IV

?

In that case you would get both racial battlecruiser skills to V.
You'll get exactly the same level of bonus to your ships after the skill change as you did before it, and since you only need the cruiser skills to 3 to fly those BCs and getting cruiser higher doesn't give bonuses to the BCs, any cruiser skill levels beyond 3 don't matter.

Antoine Jordan wrote:
So if I have Battlecruisers V and Amarr Cruiser III, after the patch I'll have Amarr Battlecruiser V, right? So that I can fly them to the same effectiveness I could before the patch.

This is correct.


Sorry to rehash something already answered, but I'm missing something.

What happens if I DON'T have Racial Cruiser to III before the change, but I have Battlecruiser V.

Let's say I have the following skills:

Battlecruiser V
Caldari Cruiser IV
Minmatar Cruiser III
Gallente Cruiser II
Amarr Cruiser 0

What do I get then?
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#145 - 2012-11-06 17:08:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
more on the ferox:

One way of making it better than the naga would be to make it able to overheat modules for a while, perhaps a 10% bonus per level to heat dissipation would make it have a cool role. (Doesn't even need a tanking bonus if it can overheat it's tank for a fight)

Coupled with a damage bonus it would make the ferox useful in quite different ways than a naga. It could hold overheated damage for quite a while and tank overheated as well. Even if its second bonus was optimal range, it would still get great damage. This bonus would be a good way to give the ferox its tank and gank with a single bonus, rather than trying to decide between the damage/optimal, optimal/tank, tank/damage bonus patterns. Also would be a good point for newbies to start stepping into the thermodynamics part of PvP, which is more reasonable to jump into once a newbie has flown frigs and cruisers.

(CCP fozzie? what do you think about this :P)

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us

Daneel Trevize
Give my 11percent back
#146 - 2012-11-06 17:08:59 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2145868#post2145868
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Wanted to quickly address two of the more common points raised so far here:

  • Skirmish links and the Amarr/Gallente command ships
  • We recognize that the skirmish links do fit especially well with Gallente blasterboats and the Gallente scram range bonuses. The initial plan here gives Skirmish to the Proteus for that reason, but it may prove a good idea to give skirmish bonuses to the Eos and Astarte as well. We are not going to rule out the possibility of making the Amarr command ships Armor/Info bonused and the Gallente command ships Armor/Skirm bonused. This would cause a significant disruption for the 7 of you that have the Eos trained specifically for Info links, but that may be a sacrifice worth making. Not going to make any promises now but it's on the table.

  • The Ferox and sniper/brawler role
  • Our ideal goal for the Ferox is a ship that can be used as either a sniper or brawler (as long as it takes advantage of the optimal bonus with blasters), but that leans a bit towards sniper. We recognize that this is going to be a very difficult like to walk considering how much competition the Attack BCs (formerly known as Tier 3) give in the sniping department. Giving it a niche may mean giving it optimal/tracking bonuses and an extra turret, it may mean a damage bonus, or it may prove impossible. Consider "Big Moa" to be a fallback if the design doesn't shape up once we start playtesting.
    Getting this ship to work will likely also require a closer look at medium railguns as a weapon system.
I can't like this sort of feedback enough. Keep up the almost-top-notch work.
Dracko Malus
Messerschmitt Vertrieb und Logistik
#147 - 2012-11-06 17:09:41 UTC
Ming Tso wrote:


Let's say I have the following skills:

Battlecruiser V
Caldari Cruiser IV
Minmatar Cruiser III
Gallente Cruiser II
Amarr Cruiser 0

What do I get then?


Caldari BC 5
Minmatar BC 5
No Gallente BC skill
No Amarr BC skill

Current Cruiser skills will have to be at 3.

Tess La'Coil's loveslave.

Finde learth
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#148 - 2012-11-06 17:09:43 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

In that case you would get both racial battlecruiser skills to V.


why not four racial battlecruiser skills to V after patch if i have bc V?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#149 - 2012-11-06 17:10:09 UTC
Ming Tso wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Intaki Kauyon wrote:
CCP: Would like a more clear representation of the BC/Destroyer skill changes.

Quote:
Reimbursement details:
•Let us repeat again: if you could fly it before, you will be able to do so after the change. Technically it means if you are able to fly an Oracle by having Amarr Cruisers 3 and Battlecruisers 3, we will remove the Battlecruisers skill from your character and give you Amarr Battlecruisers at 3. If you had Battlecruisers at 3 and Caldari Cruisers 3 instead, you would not receive Amarr Battlecruisers but the Caldari Battlecruisers skill at 3 instead. The same principle work with the Destroyers skill.
• With the way nested skill requirements work in EVE, it also means that you will still be able to fly an Apocalypse even if you don’t have the Amarr Battlecruiser skill trained at 4 after the change. It won’t matter as long as you have the Amarr Battleship skill at the proper level.

With this in mind, it becomes quite obvious to focus on training the Destroyers and Battlecruisers skills before the change to get the maximum return effect. We highly recommend you start doing so now.


That's all fine and well. But while you are warning us on what to train now, please help us understand the change. You talk about BC skills translating based on the race you own via Cruiser or Frigates, but you don't say how that translates based on reverse. For instance:

If I have currently:

BC to V
Gall Cruiser to V
but Caldari Cruiser to IV

Do I get each one of the 4 BC new skills to V just becuase of current BC is V, or do I get:

Gall BC to V
but
Caldari BC to IV

?

In that case you would get both racial battlecruiser skills to V.
You'll get exactly the same level of bonus to your ships after the skill change as you did before it, and since you only need the cruiser skills to 3 to fly those BCs and getting cruiser higher doesn't give bonuses to the BCs, any cruiser skill levels beyond 3 don't matter.

Antoine Jordan wrote:
So if I have Battlecruisers V and Amarr Cruiser III, after the patch I'll have Amarr Battlecruiser V, right? So that I can fly them to the same effectiveness I could before the patch.

This is correct.


Sorry to rehash something already answered, but I'm missing something.

What happens if I DON'T have Racial Cruiser to III before the change, but I have Battlecruiser V.

Let's say I have the following skills:

Battlecruiser V
Caldari Cruiser IV
Minmatar Cruiser III
Gallente Cruiser II
Amarr Cruiser 0

What do I get then?


Caldari Battlecruiser V, and Minmatar Battlecruiser V

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#150 - 2012-11-06 17:10:28 UTC
Any thoughts on adding another level in the hierarchy so a fleet can hold 1,281. Granted I am not a fan of massive scale combat, but the game needs it. All wars are fought on a coalition level and the players have outgrown the current max numbers allowed in a fleet. This would also open up another level of bonuses where information (or a new version of it) could see use in large scale combat. Regulating them to a squad commander spot is impractical when you are only helping out ten people total. You are just better off bringing a combat ship.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#151 - 2012-11-06 17:10:29 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
CCP Fozzie,

Is there any plans to completely change information links to something more useful? Currently shield, armor and speed links help every ship. 99% of the time players will choose one of those three over information bonuses every day of the week and twice on Sunday. The current fleet hierarchy only sees real use of bonuses in the fleet and wing command spots. Which is tank and skirmish. Would changing the info bonuses to be bonuses to drones, which 90% of all ships in the game have, be an option?

Also I am one of the 7 with max information bonuses on T3 and command ships. Blink


I trained max information warfare skills specifically for one Info Claymore fit for the AT. And then joined CCP before ever actually flying that ship on TQ.

Oops


Lol its a link that might sit well with amarr not needing the skirmish one being a bunch of bricks and all perhaps the link could have synergy with TD's and neuts perhaps but yes maybe some drone bonuses would make it interesting or make a separate drone link altogether

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

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#152 - 2012-11-06 17:11:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Marlona Sky wrote:
Any thoughts on adding another level in the hierarchy so a fleet can hold 1,281. Granted I am not a fan of massive scale combat, but the game needs it. All wars are fought on a coalition level and the players have outgrown the current max numbers allowed in a fleet. This would also open up another level of bonuses where information (or a new version of it) could see use in large scale combat. Regulating them to a squad commander spot is impractical when you are only helping out ten people total. You are just better off bringing a combat ship.


Nah what would be nice is if it was easier to get the fleet command skill instead of needing wing command lv5 as you need the skill to use a link in that position and the fleet commander doesn't seem to get the effects of being in fleet like the rest of the members do.

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

Dracko Malus
Messerschmitt Vertrieb und Logistik
#153 - 2012-11-06 17:12:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracko Malus
Finde learth wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

In that case you would get both racial battlecruiser skills to V.


why not four racial battlecruiser skills to V after patch if i have bc V?

Because you couldn't fly those two BC's before and they would have to grant you both cruisers to 3.. and seeing as cruisers require Frigate 4, that too.

Tess La'Coil's loveslave.

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#154 - 2012-11-06 17:13:15 UTC
It would make more sense for Gallente and Amarr to have the information drone bonuses then, due to them having the drone boats.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#155 - 2012-11-06 17:16:24 UTC
Heh, looks like a lot of fun awaits us in 2013.

And those TEARZ, already flowing... :)

Invalid signature format

Vereesa
Gallivanting Travel Company
#156 - 2012-11-06 17:18:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Vereesa
Changing skill requirements for capital ships from Racial Battleships 5 to 4, but introducing or increasing other skills to keep the same overall training time requirements

I think this is a bad idea. Low end capital ships at the moment have very niche roles for a pretty big ISK outlay so making people still have to train forever to get into one after having a bigger grind to get to battleships strikes me as a little unfair. 30 days is a moot point if you're going for supercapitals anyway because all the other skills will take a year or more to train and the ISK investment is colossal.
It wouldn't have been so much of a problem pre supercarrier because capital ships were deployed a lot more but now it just seems like another nail in the coffin. It doesn't affect supercapital pilots or supercapital wannabes because they're going to have to invest in a year or more of other skills after they can sit in a capital ship anyway a 30 days difference isn't a huge deal if that's what they really want to do.

Especially when 16 supercarriers with a small support fleet can do the job of about seventy odd capital ships in olden times.

It won't affect me so much anyway because I am a supercarrier pilot, I just feel bad for the new people who see capital ships and think they're awesome on their first day.
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#157 - 2012-11-06 17:18:22 UTC
I have a question about battlecruisers related their concept/role (especially non-Tier 3 battlecruisers):

What does CCP expect them to do? Frigates and cruisers seem to have a pretty clearly defined conceptual spaces: light roaming/support and heavy roaming/support, respectively. More to the point, frigates and cruiser are pretty clearly distinct in terms of how you use them. Are battlecruiser supposed to be like super-destroyers: capable of dumping all over cruisers but of limited utility vs anything else? Are they supposed to be fleet-capable cruisers that don't immediately wilt under the firepower of a modest fleet engagement? It still seems like tier 1 and 2 battlecruisers are going to be over-sized cruisers where you take a moderate hit to mobility in exchange for a lot more firepower and tank.
half san
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#158 - 2012-11-06 17:21:14 UTC
T3 ships needs to have 5% boost bonuses cos they are mainly used as fleet boosters for defending systems, and off course they give you a loot of defence power over attackers, that is normal in every fight situation. Cos you need twice as much people to atack defenders, so that you have chance to defet them. This is normal situation in any war/battle fight in history.

What gives you advantages in fight is your own tactics.

And yes T3 ship are more expensive to make, and they should me more versible for fleet boosting and command ship should be used for field/fight boosting, cos they are on field.

You should make some change about fleet/field boosting, and bring something new in that.



Dracko Malus
Messerschmitt Vertrieb und Logistik
#159 - 2012-11-06 17:21:19 UTC
Vereesa wrote:
Changing skill requirements for capital ships from Racial Battleships 5 to 4, but introducing or increasing other skills to keep the same overall training time requirements

I think this is a bad idea. Low end capital ships at the moment have very niche roles for a pretty big ISK outlay so making people still have to train forever to get into one after having a bigger grind to get to battleships strikes me as a little unfair. 30 days is a moot point if you're going for supercapitals anyway because all the other skills will take a year or more to train and the ISK investment is colossal.
It wouldn't have been so much of a problem pre supercarrier because capital ships were deployed a lot more but now it just seems like another nail in the coffin. It doesn't affect supercapital pilots or supercapital wannabes because they're going to have to invest in a year or more of other skills after they can sit in a capital ship anyway a 30 days difference isn't a huge deal if that's what they really want to do.

Especially when 16 supercarriers with a small support fleet can do the job of about seventy odd capital ships in olden times.

It won't affect me so much anyway because I am a supercarrier pilot, I just feel bad for the new people who see capital ships and think they're awesome on their first day.


But how would you feel if this increased skill would be shared across the capitals? Like JDO5 and JDC4? Like the BlackOps ships have?

Tess La'Coil's loveslave.

Jennifer A
Shutter Island
#160 - 2012-11-06 17:21:54 UTC
Would be cool if you fixed the HORRIBLE drone UI before you made half of the ships DRONEboats.