These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tim Brewer
Baba Yagas
The Initiative.
#941 - 2012-03-07 03:15:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Tim Brewer
Mussaschi wrote:
As someone with a lot of cross training the idea of relearning skills for destroyer or battle cruisers is somehow annoying. Specially if you take into account that destroyers are of little use at this point.

Some of the ideas clearly make sense to me, than I still miss handling some points in your current schema.

New types great. I still love to see a frig or destroyer size logistic ship, for fast moving groups.

I totally miss something to counter blob warfare. Is there any incentive in this, that would counter bigger blob wins regardless of strategy? Something that actually would bring FCs to distribute their fleets?

So many interesting ideas out there (direction of hit impacts dps), sensor strength in dense formation ...

So what I see now mostly feels as if you make it more noob friendly instead of more interesting :(

Still change is good, so go on



As quoted above. CCP is looking for a way to bring in more paying customers and by doing this they make the training scheme nice and friendly for everybody new to eve, all the while completely screwing all the older players.

Somehow i see a very large CCP Penis in our near future that will drive its self up all our Ass's

Note: I hope ccp doesnt donkey kick us in the **** with these changes. I among many others have done way to much speccing just to watch it all get washed away .
Lijhal
Innoruuks Wrath
#942 - 2012-03-07 03:16:48 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Ok this thread needs some love now.


SKILLS:


  • Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you can already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5.

  • BS skill at IV for capitals: alright, there is good feedback on that. Point is to make the progression consistent by requiring a skill at 4 to train for the next, higher size class, and 5 for tech 2 ships. If we feel it becomes suddenly too easy to train for capitals, we can always compensate by adding that time back on one of the other, support skill prerequisites for them. Same reasoning applies for freighters. The point of this blog is to specifically discuss such matters before moving forward with them, and for this, you are welcome.



CONFUSING BLOG PICTURES:


  • Confusion between the skill tree change and the ship tree charts: the skill change displays where we want to bring you in the long term future with the overhaul, while the ship tree chart display the current, in-game TQ ship tree. We will show the updated, long term ship trees in the next blogs when they have been fleshed out a bit.



CSM NOT INCLUDED?!:


  • I will be honest by saying this is due to my own failure here, please do not blame CCP, or any other employee on that matter. I just plainly and simply forgot to include them in the feedback process; I know that sounds incredibly stupid, unbelievable or even naive, but you have to realize that between various work duties, procedures that have to be followed, internal meetings and reviews, random design emergencies, questions that pop-up from your team, plus being split into different projects that have to be finished in time, you are bound to forget things in the heat of the moment for being tremendously busy.

    • I will not attempt to justify myself however, this was a professional blunder on top of showing a serious lack of courtesy toward them as individuals, but also as elected representatives of the player base.

    Yes, I do fully acknowledge the value they could have brought to this blog before it was released. Trust me, had I remembered about it, this would have been done as it would have saved a lot of confusion here Oops.

    That is why, not only as a CCP employee, but also as an individual, I would sincerely like to apologize to every and each member of the CSM I forgot to include here. CSM, feel free to smack me in the back of my head during Fanfest to remind me that being absent-minded has life threatening, rage inducing consequences that should be avoided at all costs.



We will keep monitoring this thread and post updates in the next days if there are more issues coming up.



+1 Ytterbium

also how about:

size:
frig
destroyer
cruiser
battlecruiser
battleship

role:
Combat ships: +attack, +defence, -mobility, -range
Skirmish ships: +attack, -defence, +mobility, -range (aka attack ships)
Support ships: -attack, +defence, -mobility, +range (aka bombardment ships)
Utility ships: -attack, -defence, +mobility, +range

spec:
T2 manufactures
LaiDai
Boundless Creations
etc.

then you have:

T1
size -> role

T2
size -> role -> specialization

T3 (if we ever get frig & bs hullls on it)
size -> generalization

thx for this and keep up the goddamn good work!

lij

your girlfriend
Gorp
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#943 - 2012-03-07 03:16:50 UTC
This ideas is so full of fail its hard to know where to begin. First, one skill for all races of destroyer/battlecruiser is a feature not a bug. It gives some much needed flexibility to both newer players (destroyers) and vets (BCs). Getting a taste of different races' capabilities without a tedious slog through skill queues is a GOOD thing.

Second, the whole "lines" vs "tiers" thing seems completely pointless from a player perspective. I guess its designed to make it easier for CCP to make wholesale changes (e.g. delete a midslot from all ships of a certain type) in the pursuit of 'balance'. But this seems wrong as the imbalances are most often found within a class.

Third, the whole exercise assumes CCP will be able to get the balance "right". They never have before, why assume they will do so now? Which leads me to...

Four, relatively painless cross-training is important because it lets players work around CCP mistakes. Their, many, many mistakes.

Finally, there seems to be an underlying assumption that EVERY ship needs to be good at all around PVP. This is nonsense. Some ships will always be better than others. There is no reason that a mining cruiser needs to be 'viable' in PVP (though some players may fit it in a way that is great in one particular circumstance and LOL in every other situation - which is fine). Furthermore, ship viability/popularity often changes as a result of changes to modules rather than the underlying hull. So the Celestis became pretty useless when Damps were nerfed.

tl;dr Not clear that CCP fully understands what problems it needs to fix.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#944 - 2012-03-07 03:17:58 UTC
Harrigan VonStudly wrote:
Just so I have this right.

There are many who think that it is ok to have to retrain what has already been planned, bought, and time spent training because we will be given the isk back and sp needed to retrain what we've already spec'd out and trained ALREADY ?

So you're ok with big brother (CCP) taking what you have already earned and making you do it over again because it's, well, only a little bit of time? Am I reading right?


Nope.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#945 - 2012-03-07 03:18:45 UTC
Basically it boils down to this...

People love it if stuff is broken in their favor. (Current situation)
People hate it that broken stuff gets fixed.


They don't care if the game is broken (And by this I mean, doesn't make sense and/or is senseless/stupid) they just want it to be broken in a way that works for them.
It's like those people who complain about welfare moms and then go collect a disability check. "But it's ok if I play the system, because I benefit. Those other people are just leeching off other people's taxes!!!"

This is why we can't have nice things.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#946 - 2012-03-07 03:19:11 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Gogela wrote:
So to be clear, if you start training BC, Destroyers, HACs, HICs, Assault Ships, Command Ships, Logistics, Black Ops, Marauders, Covert Ops, Recon Ships, Interceptors, Interdictors, and Transport Ships to V, you will get all the racial variants at V when generic skill categories go away? Sounds like a good SP investment to me. Sorry cap guns... you will have to wait. 4x SP multiplier FTW!

Big smile

Need confirmation that tech 2 ship types will be split to racial variants as well. I seem to have missed that.

...eh? Someone finally noticed. Yah I made that up... but you see, the implication is there. I'm just extrapolating on the basic principal of making this change in the first place. With each new ship roll comes a new hull, and thus a new skill. It seems reasonable to assume that if BC and Destroyers are going to get split and racialized, than so too should the generic support skills. I think this is part of how we brace for specialized caps. EW Dreadnoughts, titan killers, tackle caps, all specialized so as to require specific specializations in racial support skills. This "gives the vets something to train" and addresses the community mission statement for "moar ships" in one swift stroke. I'll make a few predictions while I'm at it: CCP is going to want to rip off the skill change bandaid® at once, knowing there will be bitter::vet tears. The BC/Destroyer debate proceeding through this thread will provide CCP with a community inspired framework for SP redistribution without necessitating CCP tip their hand on Inferno. Once inferno hits, we are informed all generic skills are going away and SP will be redistributed following the BC/Destroyer model. This will allow CCP to re-balance all the existing ships and introduce a bunch of new ones (probably including specialized caps I would guess) with a lot more future lateral for introducing still more in the future while maintaining the better quality of ship balance the new skill system allows them. That's my take on this. No editing: let's see how close to the mark I hit! Big smile

Signatures should be used responsibly...
AnzacPaul
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#947 - 2012-03-07 03:20:09 UTC
Morar Santee wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Evanga wrote:
"Destroyer and Battlecruiser reimbursement: it has been said before, but allow us to repeat again, that we do not want to cut ships you could already fly. Thus, having BC skill at 5 would mean you get all four variations at 5"

Quoted for thruth, too late CCP.

I thought that was too good to be true:

BC V = 1.5m sp
Dessie V = 0.5 m sp

All Racial BC V & Dessie V == 8 m sp... a 6 m sp boost is an assload of sp to just "give out". That's about 4 Months of free SP's....

I'm sorry, even as a vet, I just don't think we deserve that type of boost.


This is so hilarious, there is no words.

The situation looks like this:
CCP decides to take your **** away. Many players had trained the skills to fly the ships in question perfectly. Now they will get reimbursed to the point where they can still fly the ships, but have to retrain some of the racial skills to V to fly them as well as they did before.
In other words: Even veterans have to spend months to train skills that never existed, were never on their skill-plans, and should never exist in the first place.

All new players will have to invest 4x more time to get to where the veteran players are to begin with.

Even if you give CCP all the benefit of doubt in the world, the most harmless explanation for this is that they realized people tend to run out of stuff to train for eventually. If you only fly two races (minus capitals), you'll train for three odd years and be done.
With this change, the amount of time required to cross-train suddenly explodes. For no other reason than CCP being too lazy to come up with meaningful content that requires skillpoints.
Instead, they give us the same content, but it suddenly takes 4x longer to train for. With the promise there will be more ships available due to these changes soon (CCP speak for: "another abandoned feature"). And the ships we do have get pushed into WoW-ish roles, whether we want to or not.


And after hearing this, you say: "Oh no, the reimbursement is too big. We do not deserve such a SP buff!"

It's no wonder CCP thinks they can get away with whatever. Hell, if I was a Dev and read a comment like that, I'd also put more crack on the pipe and keep pushing **** at my "customers".



DEV eyes need to see this post.
Ticarus Hellbrandt
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#948 - 2012-03-07 03:23:05 UTC
Woohoo, new players will be able to train quicker into ships thay cant afford anyway.

All i can really see is classification of combat into well... classes.

Fighter

Scout

Heavy damage dealer

Healer

Carebear


You can see my disapointment as an experienced player. Once again the players are dictated the game by CCP.
Waukesha
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#949 - 2012-03-07 03:25:46 UTC
Is it time to shoot the monument again?
Imperialmadman
Doomheim
#950 - 2012-03-07 03:25:56 UTC
I WILL TAKE A BIG SH1T ON YOUR CHEST IF THIS HAPPENS
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#951 - 2012-03-07 03:26:49 UTC
Harrigan VonStudly wrote:
Just so I have this right.

There are many who think that it is ok to have to retrain what has already been planned, bought, and time spent training because we will be given the isk back and sp needed to retrain what we've already spec'd out and trained ALREADY ?

So you're ok with big brother (CCP) taking what you have already earned and making you do it over again because it's, well, only a little bit of time? Am I reading right?


As the choises are here I am thinking that option one is least bad choice. So yes.

Obviously if they do it right, big part of entire spaceship command skilltree will be reimbursed and most likely some no longer needed skills can be used to compensate towards the 3 new factions. Even without those there should be enough points to get all destro and bc skills up to level 4 if original skill was capped. This means that you can fly all factions tech 1 variants but not necessarily tech 2.

This skill reimbursement part of this plan is really something where you just have to pick the least bad option and live with it. Personally I don't see this a reason why entire plan should be cancelled as there is plenty of potential for good stuff when discussed and implemented properly.

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest
Rakshasa Taisab
Sane Industries Inc.
#952 - 2012-03-07 03:28:21 UTC
WHAT THE **** IS THIS ****???

Any _SANE_ revamp would have aimed at making it easier to crosstrain, having base ship type skills with race-specific specialization.

So that if you train for frigates which improves your frigate skills in general, you got skills for frigates but need to train e.g. Caldari frigates to be able to fly the caldari ones and get bonuses. There would thus be a backbone of ship skills that makes it easier for veteran players to cross over to other races. (The race specific skills would of course require training the lower race ship types)

Instead you've made it so that anyone who wants to try out e.g. another race's BC they'll need to start off as if they're a newbie.

What next, make sharpshooter, tracking, etc, skills for every single weapon type?

Again, **** this **** and how did you get it past the CSM?

Nyan
Vance Willett
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#953 - 2012-03-07 03:29:28 UTC
Ticarus Hellbrandt wrote:
Woohoo, new players will be able to train quicker into ships thay cant afford anyway.

All i can really see is classification of combat into well... classes.

Fighter

Scout

Heavy damage dealer

Healer

Carebear


You can see my disapointment as an experienced player. Once again the players are dictated the game by CCP.


You might as well call them Warrior, Hunter, Mage, Priest, and Shadow Priest. In three years, maybe we can get Paladins and Shamen before the two merge >.>
Moraguth
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#954 - 2012-03-07 03:30:20 UTC
Grey Stormshadow wrote:
Harrigan VonStudly wrote:
Just so I have this right.

There are many who think that it is ok to have to retrain what has already been planned, bought, and time spent training because we will be given the isk back and sp needed to retrain what we've already spec'd out and trained ALREADY ?

So you're ok with big brother (CCP) taking what you have already earned and making you do it over again because it's, well, only a little bit of time? Am I reading right?


As the choises are here I am thinking that option one is least bad choice. So yes.

Obviously if they do it right, big part of entire spaceship command skilltree will be reimbursed and most likely some no longer needed skills can be used to compensate towards the 3 new factions. Even without those there should be enough points to get all destro and bc skills up to level 4 if original skill was capped. This means that you can fly all factions tech 1 variants but not necessarily tech 2.

This skill reimbursement part of this plan is really something where you just have to pick the least bad option and live with it. Personally I don't see this a reason why entire plan should be cancelled as there is plenty of potential for good stuff when discussed and implemented properly.


Grey, I have two things to tell you. First off, the word you're looking for is choices, not choises. I noticed it the first time you used it a few pages ago, but since you did it twice, it obviously needs to be brought to your attention.
Secondly, go back to the first page and read the posts there please. You are spreading speculation that is completely contrary to what the DEVs have said.

Thanks!

I got a Feature Added!

Stop calling an Abaddon "abba-dawn".  It is "uh-bad-in" dictionary.com/abaddon
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#955 - 2012-03-07 03:30:42 UTC
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
Again, **** this **** and how did you get it past the CSM?


That's the thing, the CSM was apparently left out of the loop on this one. CCP isn't obligated to run anything by them, but it's certainly to their benefit if they do and don't want massive threadnaughts.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Teclador
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#956 - 2012-03-07 03:31:50 UTC
Ship Lines:
==========
When you change the Ship Lines, special named will be here the Bombardment Ships, then you have to change all and i mean all Weapon Platforms too.

So here is why to change all Weapon Platforms, because the Raven, Drake, Caracal (Whoo these are all Missile Boats) are now useless and will be even more useless later because hmm, let me think how to explain it right, now a missile needs ages to hit the target, but all other Weapon Platforms hit instant, but this is if you have a look in to the Reality (sorry) B.u.l.l.s.h.i.t. .

A Bullet fired by a rifle have a speed of depending on the Weapon type / Projectile type and caliber by 70 up to 2000 m/sec (rails up to 5400 mph (2414,02 m/s), tested be the US Navy). Hmm then i ask my self, why are all targets dead when I'm firing my missiles, when I'm in an mixed fleet? Because my Missiles flying with up to 8750 m/sec...?

Not to take Zero-G into account of the Bullet / Missile velocities.


To change the Ship Lines is the same as removing Caldari out of the Game or deleting simply all Missile Ships, because they getting more useless then they are now.


Skill tree change:
==============

  1. Leave BS L5 as Capital requirement. It must be that hard or even harder to get into an Capital as it is now.
  2. If you go on with Destroyers and Battlecruisers to be Racial, then not to forgot the Capital ship Skill.
  3. Oh and don't forgot the Jumpfreighter Skill, you will be loved by thousands of Industrial Pilots, for sure, really.
  4. When we get Attribute Imps > +5 ?
  5. When do you plan to pimp the Skill Que for even longer Skill planing ?
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#957 - 2012-03-07 03:32:09 UTC
Ticarus Hellbrandt wrote:
Woohoo, new players will be able to train quicker into ships thay cant afford anyway.

All i can really see is classification of combat into well... classes.

Fighter

Scout

Heavy damage dealer

Healer

Carebear


You can see my disapointment as an experienced player. Once again the players are dictated the game by CCP.

Similar ship classifications more or less exists as is. This is especially apparent in the T2 lineups. Additionally training time as proposed will increase for every non industrial/barge subcap above a frigate.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#958 - 2012-03-07 03:33:30 UTC
Ticarus Hellbrandt wrote:
Woohoo, new players will be able to train quicker into ships thay cant afford anyway.

All i can really see is classification of combat into well... classes.

Fighter

Scout

Heavy damage dealer

Healer

Carebear


You can see my disapointment as an experienced player. Once again the players are dictated the game by CCP.


Yes, allowing the majority of the ships in EVE to finally become useful is a terrible thing. It's much better to let the lower tier cruisers (for example) linger on as useless hanger ornaments because they are totally outclassed by the cruiser at the top of the Tier chain.

Besides, everybody knows you can't take a ship that has bonuses for say damage and actually tank them. It's unheard of now and certainly won't be possible once they are made viable again.

/sarcasm

CCP has always established the ground rules for our sandbox. This is of necessity, because a big sandbox without borders of some sort becomes an empty desert.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#959 - 2012-03-07 03:34:57 UTC
Quote:
I can kill you with my brain too. It's genetic.


Big smileBig smileBig smileBig smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Silath Slyver Silverpine
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#960 - 2012-03-07 03:36:08 UTC
Rakshasa Taisab wrote:
WHAT THE **** IS THIS ****???
Any _SANE_ revamp would have aimed at making it easier to crosstrain, having base ship type skills with race-specific specialization.


Why?

You're training completely different ships for each race. Different radar types. Different propulsion. Different armor and shield systems.

Look at it like this; just because a pilot is trained to fly an F-22 doesn't mean he's going to be able to fly a MiG-35.
Yeah, they're both fighter jets. They both use a flightstick. That's about where the similarities end.