These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[April] [Updated] Confessor and Svipul Balance Tweaks

First post First post
Author
Cade Windstalker
#221 - 2015-04-10 06:22:28 UTC
Lucine Delacourt wrote:
Torei Dutalis wrote:
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:


CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics.


This does seem to be the trend with these balancing threads. They are more early warning threads than actual feedback threads.



Not really true in the very recent past. iHubs and the Entosis Module had changes or things implemented based on player feedback in forum threads. We haven't seen an example in rebalancing yet though.


This actually goes back a lot further than that, but you need to bring up a glaring issue with something they're trying to fix, and proof to back it up, or make a very well supported argument with numbers and examples if you want to massively change what CCP is doing. Either that or pretty much everyone needs to be saying the same thing, if they're getting a mix of "too much" and "not enough" then they're going to figure this is a decent pass.
Idame Isqua
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#222 - 2015-04-10 08:30:58 UTC
Thanatos Marathon wrote:
Nice changes.

Now if you would just block them from small plexes :)


That will happen with the Caldari release
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#223 - 2015-04-10 10:11:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
115,481 total Svipul kills
10,975 total Svipul loses
since release (mid-Feb)
20.2k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY HALF-MONTH

120,007 total Confessor kills
10,842 total Confessor losses
Since release (December)
9.5k KILLS IN INTRODUCTORY FULL MONTH



That result is a bit skewed because of the min maxing behavior of players. If the svipul is 5% better than the confessor, that is enough for 90% of the high skilled and brain capable players to change to the svipul. That increases drastically its results. Because its win ratio is 2 times higher, does not mean it is MASSIVELY better than the confessor.

Also how many of those kills were frigates .. how many were battleships, hacs.. etc? I Would prefer a LOT a confessor to a svipul to fight against a vigilant for example. Raw numbers have useful info, but you need to analyse the effect on the player behavior to get a reasonable conclusion about them.


It doesn't take a genius to see that the Svipul is head and shoulders above the Confessor.
If you want to break it down by ship type or weapon usage month by month help yourself

The Confessor doesn't need help, and after the change it will be totally fine.
The Svipul is what needs a nerf.

If you want to keep its artillery ability then either nuke the cpu, the speed, or nuke the PG and boost the optimal bonus.




If a ships is 10% better than the other, on same role, that ship will be used by 99% of the good players. That result in a MASSIVE bloating of its killboards stats. Simple example? The tempest, is among the weakest battleships, it is barely used at all, but the peopel that use it, mostly know very well the scenarios that they are good at.. a few scenarios that they excel, the result is that is among the highest win rate for ANY battleships. That means the tempest is excelent? NO.. it is horrible because it can do only a tiny number of things, so much that no one uses it most of time? ooo does that mean it is 40 times worse than a dominix because of the total number of kills made with them? NO.. it means that the dominix is better, and being better is enough to make the ship flown 10-20 times MORE then the other, even if it were only 10% better.

We for example had EXACTLY the same kill rate with the confessor and the sivpul. The sivpul is better at the most common scenarios ? Yes... 2 times better? lol no at all. if you REMOVE the sivpul and leave the confessor as it is, the confessor kill rate will increase up to a point that is not MUCH smaller than what the sivpul has now.

CCP is wise to see that. The amount of nerfing on both and the way is not something I agree, but that when you touch the best ship you need to evaluate the most likely ship to replace its place in the food chain, that is the wisest thing you can do in game balance.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#224 - 2015-04-10 14:41:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Syrias Bizniz
Dear CCP Fozzie,

I don't understand these changes. And i am just talking about the Svipul for now, not even in contrast to the Confessor.

The Svipul has a hull bonus that grants it 10% Damage and 10% Range on small projectile weapons.
These are the 2 stats that make any minmatar hull viable to actually fit arties and not be horribly bad.

Arties have a horrible tracking, so you'd optimally want to use them while kiting. This is, using a mwd, and stay away from anything that tries to scram you, so you can keep the transversal low and defecate your artillery shells on their pretty little faces.

However, with the upcoming -10 PG nerf to the Svipul, fitting anything that is 280mms is already horrible as fock and will **** your fittingspace.
Fitting 250mm Arties *and* a tank is going to be hard as fock even with maxed out skills.


Meanwhile, fitting a 10mn Afterburner and some autocannons and a good tank is ... oh look at that, perfectly viable.


Here's 2 fits.

[Svipul, 10mn]

Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Gyrostabilizer II
Internal Force Field Array I
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
[Empty High slot]
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S

Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II
Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I


DPS: 352 with RF PP
Tank: Sweet Cool
Speed: Awesome Cool
What happens when you get scrammed: You're in autocannon range, perfect piloting!
Fitting: Tight, but sufficient. (THIS IS AFTER 10 PG NERF)


---


[Svipul, Svipul fit]

Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Warp Disruptor II

250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
[Empty High slot]
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S

Small Projectile Locus Coordinator II
Small Auxiliary Thrusters II
Small Ancillary Current Router I

Quake S x2000
Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S x2000
Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S x2000
Nanite Repair Paste x200
Navy Cap Booster 50 x270


DPS: 192 with RF Depleted Uranium (Cause if you use PP or EMP or Fusion, you have to stay within 10-15km to properly outdamage Depleted Uranium. But you don't want to be there.)
Tank: Sweet Cool
Speed: Awesome Cool
What happens when you get scrammed: You're not tracking **** and get your poophole stuffed, horrible piloting!
Fitting: Holy, like, what, Fozzie, please, where am i going to pull the lacking CPU from without making the fit expensive or dropping mobility or dps or range( which is dps, basically). I already fit 250mms, REWARD ME!



TL;DR:

Don't nerf the Svipul, nerf 10mn ABs! Upp 10mn PG - Requirements to 100! Increase Cruiser and Battlecruiser PG by 50ish to compensate!


Results: No more ~nosig~ 10mn Frigs or Dessies, slighlty more competiitive MWD cruisers and Battlecruisers, still the 100mn stuff on T3s. Cause that's another bullet, seriously.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#225 - 2015-04-10 15:08:55 UTC
People these days. Roll

I agree, AC fits with Dual MASB and 10MN have to go.

Cut the powergrid some more, Rise. Twisted
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#226 - 2015-04-10 16:36:56 UTC
Syrias Bizniz wrote:
Dear CCP Fozzie,

I don't understand these changes. And i am just talking about the Svipul for now, not even in contrast to the Confessor.

The Svipul has a hull bonus that grants it 10% Damage and 10% Range on small projectile weapons.
These are the 2 stats that make any minmatar hull viable to actually fit arties and not be horribly bad.

Arties have a horrible tracking, so you'd optimally want to use them while kiting. This is, using a mwd, and stay away from anything that tries to scram you, so you can keep the transversal low and defecate your artillery shells on their pretty little faces.

However, with the upcoming -10 PG nerf to the Svipul, fitting anything that is 280mms is already horrible as fock and will **** your fittingspace.
Fitting 250mm Arties *and* a tank is going to be hard as fock even with maxed out skills.


Meanwhile, fitting a 10mn Afterburner and some autocannons and a good tank is ... oh look at that, perfectly viable.


Here's 2 fits.

[Svipul, 10mn]

Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Gyrostabilizer II
Internal Force Field Array I
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
[Empty High slot]
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S

Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II
Small Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I
Small Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I


DPS: 352 with RF PP
Tank: Sweet Cool
Speed: Awesome Cool
What happens when you get scrammed: You're in autocannon range, perfect piloting!
Fitting: Tight, but sufficient. (THIS IS AFTER 10 PG NERF)


---


[Svipul, Svipul fit]

Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50
Warp Disruptor II

250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
[Empty High slot]
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S

Small Projectile Locus Coordinator II
Small Auxiliary Thrusters II
Small Ancillary Current Router I

Quake S x2000
Republic Fleet Phased Plasma S x2000
Republic Fleet Depleted Uranium S x2000
Nanite Repair Paste x200
Navy Cap Booster 50 x270


DPS: 192 with RF Depleted Uranium (Cause if you use PP or EMP or Fusion, you have to stay within 10-15km to properly outdamage Depleted Uranium. But you don't want to be there.)
Tank: Sweet Cool
Speed: Awesome Cool
What happens when you get scrammed: You're not tracking **** and get your poophole stuffed, horrible piloting!
Fitting: Holy, like, what, Fozzie, please, where am i going to pull the lacking CPU from without making the fit expensive or dropping mobility or dps or range( which is dps, basically). I already fit 250mms, REWARD ME!



TL;DR:

Don't nerf the Svipul, nerf 10mn ABs! Upp 10mn PG - Requirements to 100! Increase Cruiser and Battlecruiser PG by 50ish to compensate!


Results: No more ~nosig~ 10mn Frigs or Dessies, slighlty more competiitive MWD cruisers and Battlecruisers, still the 100mn stuff on T3s. Cause that's another bullet, seriously.


Dual MASB arty with x2 gyro? Lol. You cant have your cake and eat it too.

Arty boats are always skimpy on tank. Some worse than others (no tank arty wolf). They require SKILL, and speed as the primary way to survive. You cant have max tank, gank, speed and projection. That is the definition of overpowered.

Drop a MASB, replace with web. Drop a nano and add MAPC (navy one for max PG), that might free up enough grid for 280s to work. Try this:

x6 280s

fleeting web
t2 point
Limited 1mn mwd

Nano
x2 tracking enhancer
gyro

ACR
polycarb
burst aerator

That was my svipul fit before nerf. With sabot shot out to 40km, went 3400ish (cold, 5k hot) in prop mode and still had great tracking. Could easily kill garms/tackle. Did 190-290dps depending on ammo.

I might have to drop a poly or nano for another grid mod. Guess we will see.
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#227 - 2015-04-10 18:39:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Syrias Bizniz
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

stuff




The whole point was actually to show how ******* ******** the proposed changes are. ******* over arties while still maintaining 10mn dual asb fits (that are scram immune!) on an arty hull is kinda horrible design.

Fun fact, if you drop one of the Nanos, you're just BARELY faster than a 10mn Svipul. While having all the disadvantages: Lower DPS, Sigbloom, lower tracking, less range control.


Edit: The first step to change the svipul is to take away it's ability to 10mn it. And THEN you can start balancing it properly.
Torei Dutalis
IceBox Inc.
Rogue Caldari Union
#228 - 2015-04-10 20:44:30 UTC
Lucine Delacourt wrote:
Torei Dutalis wrote:
Nightfox BloodRaven wrote:


CCP has made decision.. the rest is semantics.


This does seem to be the trend with these balancing threads. They are more early warning threads than actual feedback threads.



Not really true in the very recent past. iHubs and the Entosis Module had changes or things implemented based on player feedback in forum threads. We haven't seen an example in rebalancing yet though.


Perhaps I should have said ship balancing threads. To be fair, in your example they were planning on iterating on the very loose sov presentation (which still may not be done) and they had how many hundred pages of tears about interceptors? And the t2 link still has a 250km range....what? I'd like to see responses to some of the actual, reasonable, number filled posts from people who actually fly in and against these ships. Those are the posts that seem to be ignored. There have been a lot of unnecessary nerfs to things like light missiles and tracking enhancers, or balancing passes on ships where they give a ship +3 CPU when it needs a completely different weapon bonus to not be overlapping with multiple other ships. Anyway, rant over.
Murkelost
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#229 - 2015-04-11 09:31:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Murkelost
Your powergrid decrease is to much. And there is another solution to this issue.

Read: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=418061&find=unread
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#230 - 2015-04-11 11:01:13 UTC
Murkelost wrote:
Your powergrid decrease is to much. And there is another solution to this issue.

Read: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=418061&find=unread


No.

Fit more MAPCs. Blink
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#231 - 2015-04-11 18:35:37 UTC
Make arty not take over 3 time as much PWG per gun as autos and then re-babalce ships using these around. How can you hope to balance the tank/prop mod of a ship when one of the largest PWG requirement is 3 time as much as the other available option?
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#232 - 2015-04-11 19:46:57 UTC
With these changes, Arty fits are balanced PG-wise, it is the ACs that have disproportionately low PG requirements and need to be looked at.
Murkelost
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#233 - 2015-04-11 19:51:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Murkelost
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Make arty not take over 3 time as much PWG per gun as autos and then re-babalce ships using these around. How can you hope to balance the tank/prop mod of a ship when one of the largest PWG requirement is 3 time as much as the other available option?


The PWR grid nerf is not gonna prevent people from fitting a 10mn AB from what I've learned (atleast what it seems like at this point). Basically this means that the nerf is for nothing PWR grid wise, which is why I think the only solution would be to limit propulsion mods size wise toward specific ship sizes... Just saying Blink

The only thing the nerf is going to change is to be able to fit a descent 1mn propulsion setup without having to spam rigslots and lowslots with pwr grid increasing modules.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#234 - 2015-04-11 20:06:47 UTC
Murkelost wrote:
Basically this means that the nerf is for nothing PWR grid wise, which is why I think the only solution would be to limit propulsion mods size wise toward specific ship sizes... Just saying Blink


A rather drastic change because of one ship. One ship and its ACs to be exact. Blink

AC PG needs to be looked at, nothing more.
Kaede Hita
K.H. Holding
#235 - 2015-04-11 21:51:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaede Hita
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. As we mentioned on the o7 show today, we're making some balance changes to the
Material Requirements:
+1 to each of Electromechanical Interface Nexus, Fullerene Intercalated Sheets, Optimized Nano-engines, Reconfigured Subspace Calibrator, Self-Assembling Nanolattice, Warfare Computation Core

These changes are intentionally limited in scope as we want to take advantage of our rapid release cadence to make small changes and observe effects. We are very interested in hearing your feedback!


Pure speculation, but are you sure the prices are not going down just because more people are dwelling/looting in WH space ?
I suppose T3 prices are not dropping as fast because people are used to pay top ISK for the hull. I am not a market specialist, I just want to make sure there is not barking at the wrong tree going on. Maybe someone well-versed in eve market could enlightened us please ?


One thing I find a bit annoying, when there is nerfing/balancing coming, I have to scroll down after the dev post to know specifically what kind of abuse is going with the ship. I would prefer straightforward reason on the opening post, so I can know what is going on and why. Some people are not that familiar with forums and/or latest patches might find some of the changes a bit cryptic. And it may increases troll detection as well.


10mn destroyers with good range and damage and tanking is a bad idea, I believe the change is needed.
Murkelost
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2015-04-12 08:10:57 UTC
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Murkelost wrote:
Basically this means that the nerf is for nothing PWR grid wise, which is why I think the only solution would be to limit propulsion mods size wise toward specific ship sizes... Just saying Blink


A rather drastic change because of one ship. One ship and its ACs to be exact. Blink

AC PG needs to be looked at, nothing more.


You are totally right on the fact that it is a drastic change, but if it's wrong to fit a 10MN AB to a t3 destroyer, why would it then still be possible to fit it to such a vessel, or any other small vessel for that matter. With this said it is just not only about one ship but all. propulsion size mods vs ship size. It just happened to be the awesomeness of a t3 destroyer that surfaced the very dilemma Cool

This is only why I found it to be a better problemsolver to do this instead of nerfing ships in themselves. Roll
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#237 - 2015-04-12 09:32:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
It is more reasonable to drop base speed of the hulls, or even tweak bonuses given in (each) tacticool mode.

This game has history with oversized, extreme, often broken setups that work super good if only for a time, as the practice in question gets nerfbatted. I don't recall a change that put artificial restrictions just because of 1-2 boats.

In the nanu era stacking penalty was introduced, so battleships couldn't reach 5 km/speeds with inty acceleration. Smile You can still fit 8 nanus if you want, effective bonus not being what you expect it to be notwithstanding. Likewise for damage mods - stacking penalty faded the 8 Heatsink Geddon - 4 damage mod setups are still viable, though most of them are PvE spaceships.

Very early in the game, fitting multiple prop mods of the same type and their simultaneous activation prompted a restriction of the number of active propulsion modules to 1. You can still fit AB + MWD today.

Yes, T3Ds with 10MNs are cancr.

Yes, there will be less of it.

Yes, there will be some drawbacks to fitting one now.

Yes, it may require further review of the specific hulls in question.

Yes, AC Sviipul still bad. Pirate
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#238 - 2015-04-13 03:32:06 UTC
Face it, whether it was Tengus with 100mn Afterburners or T3D's with 10mn Afterburners, they are both cancerous. Get rid of that fitting option, then balance the ships.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Alexis Nightwish
#239 - 2015-04-13 03:52:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Alexis Nightwish
There's a lot of hate towards oversized ABs on these ships. No one brings webs or neuts to fight these? Have people not noticed that by spending 25pg on them you're limiting the other aspects like damage, tank, etc.? Also, even in propulsion mode they take ages to get up to speed and still handle like hippos. My point is that these ships are the first outside of niche fits like 100MN Stabber FIs to be able to fit oversized prop mods and still be effective. Removing that pushes us away from fit heterogenization, and that IMO, is a bad thing.

Rather than removing fitting options I'd rather see stats such as HP, speed, agility, sensor strength, etc. shifted to the stances and the cooldown on switching stances increased to 20 seconds to further amplify the importance of wise tactical choices in combat. This would reduce the 'too good at everything all the time' issue that plagues T3D balance. It would also align with Fozzie's stated goal of "power and excitement to mainly come from the new mode switching mechanic, and less from the base stats of the ship outclassing its competition."

I think the proposed changes, particularly the cap and PG nerfs, are terrible, especially for the Confessor which relies heavily on them, regardless of prop mod. The only change I like is the build cost. Ships of this power should be no less than 60m.

Lastly, I find it very sad that Ishtars/VNIs have been broken for over a year and have barely received a slap on the wrist, but the T3Ds have been out for a few months and are getting neutered hard. "Limited in scope"? Hardly.

CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge

EVE Online's "I win!" Button

Fixing bombs, not the bombers

Mayhaw Morgan
State War Academy
Caldari State
#240 - 2015-04-13 05:05:16 UTC
As someone who has been putting oversized ABs on my ships since Apocrypha, I feel like I should come in and at least defend the psychology of the choice.

Starting out as a young Minmatar pilot, you always hear "Minmatar ships are fast." This is true, until someone gets webs on you or shuts your MWD off with a scram or if you are fitted with a regular sized afterburner versus a MWDing opponent. At that point, the whole balance of your fitting is usually entirely negated. You can't track. You can't run. You either have a gimped capacitor from fitting a MWD or you are using capacitor to run an afterburner that does essentially nothing for you. You might as well not even have fit a propulsion module, but you can't go back to the fitting window and fix it, now. You're just . . . dead in the water. (Pun intended.)

What do you do? How do you ensure that your opponent doesn't just point->click-> and shut off your ability to maneuver effectively?

A warp disruptor is already telling my ship what to do: Do not warp out!
A warp scrambler 1-ups that: Do not warp out and shut down your MWD!
A webifier: Fly (much) slower!

As a young destroyer pilot (Thrasher and Catalyst, mostly), all I really wanted, and still want even now, is a module that answers a warp disruptor and/or a warp scrambler and/or a stasis webifier and/or a warp disruptor bubble or scripted warp disruption field generator, simply: No!

Is the problem that I'm moving too fast and you can't stop me or is the problem that you expect to dictate how I fly MY SPACESHIP by clicking just one or two buttons?