These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: No Brakes - Ship and module Balancing in Retribution 1.1

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#181 - 2013-02-17 05:06:06 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:
What about the Pirate frigates/cruisers rebalance?


Should be coming with the faction ship rebalance. (Worm especially needs one)

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#182 - 2013-02-17 07:25:11 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Vaju Enki wrote:
What about the Pirate frigates/cruisers rebalance?


Should be coming with the faction ship rebalance. (Worm especially needs one)


Worms should be lowly. A kickass Worm is a contradiction in terms (and also unfair to moles).

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#183 - 2013-02-17 08:14:45 UTC
Callduron wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Vaju Enki wrote:
What about the Pirate frigates/cruisers rebalance?


Should be coming with the faction ship rebalance. (Worm especially needs one)


Worms should be lowly. A kickass Worm is a contradiction in terms (and also unfair to moles).


Thats why in the process they rename it to wyrm instead and make it awesome (should be better than a tristan at least which is currently not even nearly the case)

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#184 - 2013-02-17 09:46:59 UTC
I just want to reiterate my concern that all the balancing team seem to focus on is improving the tanking ability of ships.

The '"gank" ability of ships hasn't had any real help for years (with the exception of drone damage mods) and really could do with some looking at by the balancing chaps.

Specifically I'd like them to look at Weapon Rigging, removing the stacking penalties, and perhaps changing the Algid rigs to some 10% per level to heat reduction so "overheat gank" can actually last a while longer.

Right now fights are lasting longer and longer and fitting more tank almost always wins out versus fitting more gank in small or solo fights.

'Tier 3' BC were a refreshing additional option to gank, but they appear next on your *presumably* nerf DPS increase tank list, hopefully you won't ruin their unique profile by reducing their gank.

Ta.
Yankunytjatjara
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#185 - 2013-02-17 10:51:36 UTC
Concerning iteration, I was wondering if the rifter is considered balanced now. I have a sensation that the minmatar workhorse became quite outdated after the introduction of the slasher.

Obviously, I am biased, as good old CCP Diagoras made clear: http://twitter.com/CCP_Diagoras/status/185397710394900480

Still... Why would anyone choose it over the faster slasher? The only advantage seems to be the possibility to add a rocket launcher... How about replacing the tracking bonus with a RoF bonus, making it a smaller version of the ruppie?

My solo pvp video: Yankunytjude... That attitude! Solo/small gang proposal: Ship Velocity Vectors
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#186 - 2013-02-17 11:17:14 UTC
Question for CCP.
What is happening with the Gnosis. Is this scheduled for any time soon, or simply a test server ship?
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#187 - 2013-02-17 13:30:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Callduron
Grideris wrote:
Question (and forgive me if this has already been asked): Does the Repair Systems skill reduce the cycle time of the AAR like it does for normal armour repair modules?


AAR is exactly like a regular repper in every way except it boosts the reps when loaded and it's a little under regular reps when dry.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#188 - 2013-02-17 13:35:19 UTC
Yankunytjatjara wrote:
Concerning iteration, I was wondering if the rifter is considered balanced now. I have a sensation that the minmatar workhorse became quite outdated after the introduction of the slasher.

Obviously, I am biased, as good old CCP Diagoras made clear: http://twitter.com/CCP_Diagoras/status/185397710394900480

Still... Why would anyone choose it over the faster slasher? The only advantage seems to be the possibility to add a rocket launcher... How about replacing the tracking bonus with a RoF bonus, making it a smaller version of the ruppie?


Rifter has higher base shields and armour and gets an extra low rather than a mid. Try an AAR Rifter against other people's Slashers next week, it should take them in a straight brawl.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#189 - 2013-02-17 14:51:30 UTC
Nomistrav wrote:
Suffice to say, my Dominix will probably still be using the ASB simply because I can dish out more Drone Damage Amplifiers with less risk involved in my Active Tanking.


This is the expected outcome for a lot of armour repairing ships that have 4+ mids - they'll continue to shield tank for pve or pvp simply because it's better.
Merouk Baas
#190 - 2013-02-17 15:46:54 UTC
Vyktor Abyss wrote:
The '"gank" ability of ships hasn't had any real help for years (with the exception of drone damage mods) and really could do with some looking at by the balancing chaps.


Personally, I disagree; a lot of the frigates, destroyers, and cruisers they've rebalanced thus far completely sucked for DPS before and now they do not. They have made a lot of ships usable (with damage, not just tanking). They were in a sorry state before.

What they have NOT done is improve the gank capabilities of the top / most popular ships.

And as far as "tank" improvements, they seem to be limiting the improvements to just the capability to burst-tank for a few cycles and then you're done / dead. Sort of like an oh-**** button. People keep it pressed all the time, which is why they're forcing 1 minute cooldowns, but all in all it does give the ability to react in a fight, a little bit.
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#191 - 2013-02-17 17:42:32 UTC
Nikuno wrote:
Nomistrav wrote:
Suffice to say, my Dominix will probably still be using the ASB simply because I can dish out more Drone Damage Amplifiers with less risk involved in my Active Tanking.


This is the expected outcome for a lot of armour repairing ships that have 4+ mids - they'll continue to shield tank for pve or pvp simply because it's better.


Just think it's very bizarre how Shield Tanking and Armor Tanking are basically switching roles with Shield Active starting to look more practical than Armor Active tanking.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#192 - 2013-02-17 18:12:50 UTC
Fozzie, somewhere in the retribution 1.1 ship rebalancing thread u said there will be a change to some of the battlecruisers ship type ID's (as seen in the overview contact type ID) stating that there will be some new ones. was wondering if you have info on what their type ID's will actually be in order to amend the xml files for all the custom profiles we use in advance.

tyvm m8!
ElDiabloRojo
Colossus Technologies
Project Wildfire
#193 - 2013-02-17 21:10:15 UTC
Maybe instead of Combat Battle Cruiser and Attack Battle Cruiser you should rename them to Combat Heavy Cruiser and Attack Heavy Cruiser (or Heavy Attack/Combat Cruiser)
Aroye
Mechvale Planetside Productions
#194 - 2013-02-17 22:18:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Aroye
The question is:

"In 1.1 the Drake is trading one launcher for a doubled damage bonus, gaining slightly increased potential damage and lower ammo use at the expense of less damage flexibility."

Doesn't that mean the drake will in effect, have the fire power of 12 missle lauchers? The math is (7-1) x 2 = 12 . I don't get how double damage bonus of 6 luanchers would slightly increase the potential damage. Someone please explain this to me.
Mund Richard
#195 - 2013-02-17 22:43:34 UTC
Aroye wrote:
The question is:

"In 1.1 the Drake is trading one launcher for a doubled damage bonus, gaining slightly increased potential damage and lower ammo use at the expense of less damage flexibility."

Doen't that mean the drake will in effect, have the fire power of 12 missle lauchers? The math is (7-1) x 2 = 12 . I don't get how double damage bonus of 6 luanchers would slightly increase the potential damage. Someone please explain this to me.

In this context:
5% per level = single
2*5% per level = double

In other context, just as you showed, it can mean vastly different things.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#196 - 2013-02-18 00:00:01 UTC
The proposed changes to Armour Plates looks good.

It enables player choice and fitting options ... which a huge 'sheenerism'
Karl Hobb
Imperial Margarine
#197 - 2013-02-18 01:27:43 UTC
Thought I'd stop by and thank you guys for changing the Ferox into awesome. Full rack of Neutrons with no fitting mods makes me happy. I am also looking forward to the revamped Brutix. Keep up the great work, there's so many useful ships now that I never know what to fly on any given night.

A professional astro-bastard was not available so they sent me.
Captain Africa
GRIM MARCH
#198 - 2013-02-18 09:21:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Africa
Howdy !

Firstly CCP Fozzie I want to thank you for all the hard work you guys are doing , it must be a hella of a job trying to satisfy everyone at the same time , this tug of war between Eve Ships and races has been going on for years now.

However ......Shocked

Doode , you realize that to fit a ship and get the max out of it takes dedication , time and money....I just get the feeling you are penalizing Vets that can fit ships to the max by removing ship slots...I mean take the cane for example, to have a descent tank , gank and those two neuts , you really have to have a F***k load of sp in the right places.

If a newb gets ganged by a more superior player ...the first thing HE WILLL SHOUT IS , ....its OP! I don’t want to create the impression I’m crying bucket loads of tears, cause I am ... but really keep the slots on the ships and just reward players that’s willing to put the miles into ships ...to have a **** hot drake or caine.

I mean implement a skill that opens up a slot when trained to lev 5 or something ....or a combination of skills like the race cruiser skill to 5 land maybe elite certificates in core skills.

I think everyone would love to be able to choose a ship they like and say I’m going to train 6 more months or a year to make this my preferred tool of destruction....and customize the ship according to players abilities...that my friend is something called law of the jungle...you cant go against that lol


It really feels like the ships are losing their individuality and overall appeal and btw so does the races they are all becoming the same. I mean take the shield tanking vs armor tanking scenario...Since I started playing Eve my "elders" told me :

- never mix your tank ...
- shield tanking is good for guerrilla war fare and
- armor was better for fleet PVP and PVE...in general.

Players conveniently forgets that shield tanking takes a lot more training than armor tanking. Mods should also reflect the training investment from players , otherwise what the hell is the use! I spend 8 mil sp in mechanics for a very good reason .....to negate the neg effects of rigs ..and it took me MONTHS !!!! Now ur juggling my effort like its a JOJO ...

The reason why my armor tank bs out runs yours ..simple Ï TRAINED for it ..Not because some dev changed the base stats....Changing ships should be the holy grail....not to be taken lightly ....why caue your screwing with someons effort ...

I like where your taking rebalancing don’t get me wrong ....but reward players that has been supporting Eve for years also , that shows dedication toward their trade...cause you know what , NEWBS COME AND GO....VETS are they guys with 4-5 accounts and makes Eve their preferred life style....


Remember effort = reward
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#199 - 2013-02-18 10:22:17 UTC

Another great SMA post.

(Not)

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Captain Africa
GRIM MARCH
#200 - 2013-02-18 10:36:10 UTC
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:

Another great SMA post.

(Not)




This is my view , not my alliances point of view ....This pattern of SMA hate from you seems to becoming more frequent in the forums ...... Im starting to get the feeling at some point in time SMA smacked your punk ass bum and your still hurting. He he bro ... look when you were still figuring out how to install Eve I already had my OWN alliance in 0.0., so next time you have a problem with my ideas or posts take it up with me and leave SMA out of the mix. I am asking nicely now, ok Question