These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: Rebalancing EVE, one ship at a time

First post First post
Author
matarkhan
ConHugeCo
Atlas. Alliance
#401 - 2012-03-06 20:02:33 UTC
Bullshit bullshit bullshit.

The generic skills are one of the things I love about Eve, and they make sense in the role they're in.

Is it someone's job @ CCP to anger veterans? Seriously?
Justin Cody
War Firm
#402 - 2012-03-06 20:02:41 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Kozmic wrote:
Cronus Zontanos wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:


We'll sit down and have a chat about it, but what we're looking to do is create a solid ship scheme, not take things away from people. You'll be reimbursed properly.


People need to stop freaking about the skill change and just read this. The devs realize how many skill points this could set people back, and should be able to reimburse properly. I'm sure there's someone on the team who's good enough at some math to figure out an algorithm to get everyone set straight on skills. Plus like they said nothing is set in stone.

Great Devbolg Ytterbium, really looking forward to how the changes end up working out.


Yes - cause God knows CCP never promised anything it didn't follow through. Enjoing walking around your establishments talking to other players in sov-iterated 0.0 with fixed supercaps, are you?


Heaven forbid a game company talk about what they want to do with their game in the future.



and this is fine as long as you don't take away from other people...stream lining the system is good. However I say keep BS5 for capitals. There has to be some barrier to entry.

BS4 for caps is like...an Achura level mistake.
kyrieee
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#403 - 2012-03-06 20:02:42 UTC
I haven't read any good arguments for introducing racial BC skills.
The devblog says it streamlining, but I think it's the opposite.
And of course, it will hurt new players the most.
Heimdallofasgard
Ministry of Furious Retribution
Fraternity.
#404 - 2012-03-06 20:02:58 UTC
Shin Dari wrote:
CCP Guard wrote:
Re-balancing is on our minds as many of you know and CCP Ytterbium is here to tell you all about some major changes we'll be seeing the start of soon.

Please go here to read the blog and as always, we're eager to hear your feedback.
I have been looking at the math of the current suggestion, and that seems to be a bit hard to implement properly. Racial specialization is good, but why not accept a matrix?

Axis 1: Frigate -> Destroyer -> Cruiser -> Battlecruiser -> Battleship -> Capitals
Axis 2: Racial ship skill (high rank skill)

Example "Amarr Ship" skill:
Amarr Ships 1: Amarr Small ships
Amarr Ships 2: Amarr Medium ships
Amarr Ships 3: Amarr Large ships
Amarr Ships 4: Amarr Capital ships
Amarr Ships 5: Amarr Super-Capitals ships

An Amarr Noob will start with Amarr Ships 1 and Frigate 1.

A reimbursement under a matrix system could require less SP (depends upon the ranks) and be far simpler to implement.


Interesting method, this favours cross training HUGELY, which I think ccp are trying to move away from.

I for one am in the camp of specialisation, I think cross training should be made as difficult as possible, in this way, a character becomes introduced to the concepts of each race slowly, instead of getting Battle cruisers and stepping right into a drake as the first thing they've flown outside of amarrian ships.

Each race should have its own learning curve, I for one trained gallente first, and now have the properties of all their ammo types memorised. I cross trained to amarr and fly abaddons in fleets but still have no idea what t1 crystals your supposed to use for certain ranges.
Akelorian
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#405 - 2012-03-06 20:03:15 UTC
CCP Soundwave to Goons: Herp Derp BS4 for Capitals
CCP Soundwave to Eve: Yea we ruining your game like promised
Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#406 - 2012-03-06 20:03:33 UTC
Question:

Why not provide an automated query to every player pertaining to their choice?

For example:

"Dear Player:

You currently possess two skills which are going to be removed from the system. You have one of two options:

1. Exchange your current Skill by all Racial skills at the level you currently have the original skill at. You have Battlecruiser 5, so if you take option 1, you will have: Amarr Battlecruiser 5, Caldari Battlecruiser 5, Gallente Battlecruiser 5 and Minmatar Battlecruiser 5.

2. Exchange your current Skill for skill points. These skill points are identical to all skillpoints currently applied in the following Skill: Battlecruisers 5. You will be given twice the present allocated ammount, to enable you to train either two Racial Battlecruiser skills to 5, or choose somethign else entirely.

Thank you for your attention."
ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#407 - 2012-03-06 20:03:46 UTC
IM ANGRY because effectivly nothing is going to change for me!!! iv been promised that il be able to fly the same ships as before AND CCP has alowd themself the ability to balance the game BETTER and introduce MOAR ships!!! THIS SENSIBLE LOGIC MAKES ME ANGRY!!!

+1 CCP

No Worries

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#408 - 2012-03-06 20:03:51 UTC
Quote:
alright... another example then.

Before the days of the drake, there was only the ferox. Poor ferox wasn't very good with turrets. The players still needed something to run L3 missions with, but luckily, CCP had given the ferox unbonused launcher hard points.

The role of the ferox as designed by CCP was quite clear. The only reason the ferox ever peaked up above 10% market share of production was it's missile hard points that allowed it to be a very viable mission boat.

The whole point is that just because CCP gives a ship a role, doesn't mean that's what players will use it for.

Also, cormoront = salvager. Nothing else needs said here.


Actually, CCP designed part of the Ferox role to be a flexible platform that was also viable with missiles. This flexibility wasn't an unforseen mutation that "just happens sometimes".

CCP designs many ships to be flexible, in fact it is the guiding philosophy behind a great many ships in EVE. This is by design... a design created by the same people who will be rebalancing for this release as well.

I'm not sure what your reference to the cormorant is relating to, you can use most any ship as a salvager... and all destroyers do rather well in that role.


View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Temmu Guerra
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#409 - 2012-03-06 20:03:58 UTC
Morar Santee wrote:
blah blah blah blah



I bet your one of those people that screams for all the ships to be useful and now when CCP is making an effort you cry about it.... Your tears are delicious
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#410 - 2012-03-06 20:04:26 UTC
i wish you the best that this works without showstoppers. They look like fairly risky changes to me.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Death Reactor
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#411 - 2012-03-06 20:04:29 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9129 wow

I will not spend one second training for a ship that i can already fly. If it goes through as is ill be suiciding my aeon into the sun and go play mw3.

Edit: Personal attack removed, CCP Phantom.
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#412 - 2012-03-06 20:05:00 UTC
The OP was good and I love the changes. they make sense, they are ok.
What I didn't like is the lack of information about the way this change migration will occur and the way these changes are going to affect my future training plan.

In the blog I read " would not need to re-train anything to fly Battleships or Cruisers" and that is a good thing but only solves 1 issue, in my opinion people have 1 other import issue with these changes:

- People will login in the next day and find several holes in their skill training tree

My sugestion to cover this "hole":

1 - If a pilot cannot fly a cruiser of any race and have the destoryer skill book injected give him the SP trained and money back.
2 - If a pilot can fly a cruiser of a race, give them that race destroyer skill with sp trained at level 4.
3 - if a pilot can fly a l.interdicter of any race, give give them that race destroyer skill with sp trained at level 5.

4 - If a pilot cannot fly a battleship of any race and have the battlecruiser skill book injected give him the SP trained and money back.
5 - If a pilot can fly a battleship of a race, give then that race battlecruiser skill with sp trained at level 4.
6 - if a pilot can fly a command ship of any race, give give them that race battlecruiser skill with sp trained at level 5.

Now I can see also that people that are currenlty trainning cross race and didn't finished the trainning for those ship types will be pissed. to minimize this I propose that:

1 - CCP offers the new raciall skill books to everone with minimum requirements to have them, for free.
2 - CCP offer free SP that match the current sum of the SP trained in the destroyer and battlecruiser skills that were taken way.
3 - CCP announces the patch date with at least 3 months distance so people can prioritize and train skills and finish their current training runs for interdictors or command ships.


PS:

Give me my level 5 caldari battleship SP back please!

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)

Plyn
Uncharted.
#413 - 2012-03-06 20:06:29 UTC
Confirming I will be changing my skill queue to BC 5 when I get home this evening, in hopes of getting all 4 races BC 5 when the change happens. Twisted

<3 Soundwave, Guard, and Ytterbium

I strongly suggest you move your "We are not going to kill your crosstrainz" comments to the actual dev blog before this thread reaches 100 pages of people complaining about stuff you already said you were going to make not suck....
Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
Joint Venture Conglomerate
#414 - 2012-03-06 20:07:25 UTC
How would removal of the tier system affect the manufacturing cost of T1 ships or their BPO costs?

Fear God and Thread Nought

Duvida
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#415 - 2012-03-06 20:07:25 UTC
Nick Bison wrote:
Mibad wrote:
Very "sound" changes ;) Will be great to streamline everything to make ship balancing much easier. I'm all for it.

Still amazes me how many people here rage about the skill change fail to read the whole blog. You know the very important part that says you will be fully reimbursed and still able to fly what you did before...


This.

Seems some folk need to brush up on reading comprehension ... or just read the fricken dev blog to begin with.


This is the main reason I'm not in total fear of this change. It isn't going to take me years to get back to where I was.

I appreciate how large an undertaking this is going to be. It's going to be a huge adjustment, and require tweaking by the devs for a while in order to be successful. Dropping it in mid-course would be bad, to understate it a little. P

That said, I didn't feel like I was hindered by the current system. Perhaps it was because we're on even ground in EVE in this regard. If it was broken, it was broken the way we liked it. Lol

I have frustrations with EVE, but this wasn't one for me. (Thank you for the little things thread, btw) Was it a frustration that was brought up by the CSM?

Tangent:

CCP, a bit of tin-hattery on my part, but is any of this motivated by a sense of 'If the devs aren't working on something we think is important right now, they will be let go right now?'. That sense can cause people to push forward on things that weren't urgent or largely desired, just to keep from becoming unemployed.
Szilardis
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#416 - 2012-03-06 20:07:29 UTC
I always recommend that my nubbins train BC 5 and Dessie 5 because the wealth of ships opened up by those two generic skills keeps them interested for months while they learn about ships, and even longer once they realize they love those ships. I'd rather that not be taken away.
Stark Thunder
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#417 - 2012-03-06 20:07:43 UTC
Removal of tiers = good

Removing BS 5 from cap ships = not so good
Eather leave it at bs or bs 4 for dreads/carrers and bs 5 for supers.

Removing generic destroyer and BC skils = OK
As long as I dont have to retrain to fly my ships. I can see several ways to do it most of whitch have been mentiond allready except for leaving it for people who have alredy trained it and creating new skils for anybody who wants to start training it.

Putting destroyers and BC as prereqs. for cruiser and bs = bad Leave it out of the progression or make it a seprate one Frig > Destroyer > BC & Frig > Crusier > BS
Heimdallofasgard
Ministry of Furious Retribution
Fraternity.
#418 - 2012-03-06 20:08:45 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Phantom
Death Reactor wrote:
http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9129 wow

I will not spend one second training for a ship that i can already fly. If it goes through as is ill be suiciding my aeon into the sun and go play mw3.


The number of space likes you have... is inversely proportional to how angry you are about the proposed changes

i.e: you have no space likes... You're very angry about the proposed changes
Ugleb
Jotunn Risi
#419 - 2012-03-06 20:08:54 UTC
When the generic destroyer and BC skills first came out I thought that it was a mistake to not make them racial. Unfortunately its been a long, long, time since then and doing this now is going to some people a considerable amount of inconvenience.

However, I think the proposed system does make alot more sense and I agree that it does open up new possibilities.

Whomever in CCP decided to push for this has cohones of steel and the size of beach balls. Shocked

A couple of suggestions to ease the pain;
* Seed the new racial destroyer/BC skill books well ahead of the switchover to allow for at least some cross-training. Simply seed them as books that don't connect to anything then when the time comes remove and reimburse the SP for the generic books.

* consider making the new racial books a temporarily lower rank so that they can be trained more quickly for pilots to catch-up? Then revert them to the correct rank on switch over day. (Possibility of abuse?)

http://uglebsjournal.wordpress.com/

The Jotunn Risi are now recruiting, Brutor ancestry required in order to best represent the Brutor interest.  Join channel JORIS to learn more!

Mikron Alexarr
New Age Solutions
#420 - 2012-03-06 20:11:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Mikron Alexarr
Ranger 1 wrote:
Quote:
alright... another example then.

Before the days of the drake, there was only the ferox. Poor ferox wasn't very good with turrets. The players still needed something to run L3 missions with, but luckily, CCP had given the ferox unbonused launcher hard points.

The role of the ferox as designed by CCP was quite clear. The only reason the ferox ever peaked up above 10% market share of production was it's missile hard points that allowed it to be a very viable mission boat.

The whole point is that just because CCP gives a ship a role, doesn't mean that's what players will use it for.

Also, cormoront = salvager. Nothing else needs said here.


Actually, CCP designed part of the Ferox role to be a flexible platform that was also viable with missiles. This flexibility wasn't an unforseen mutation that "just happens sometimes".

CCP designs many ships to be flexible, in fact it is the guiding philosophy behind a great many ships in EVE. This is by design... a design created by the same people who will be rebalancing for this release as well.

I'm not sure what your reference to the cormorant is relating to, you can use most any ship as a salvager... and all destroyers do rather well in that role.




Draft saved the wrong part of the post - wtf CCP.

Yes, flexibility is the point here. Leave the ships to be flexible without specializing them so much that they have only one viable role. Tech 3 ships are wildly popular, because they follow this philosophy.

The cormy was a good salvager for me, because I had that racial frigate at the time and I think it had good fitting for salvage tackle. It's been awhile though.