These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1061 - 2012-03-07 09:22:11 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
The skill requirement changes for destroyers and battlecruisers is very tricky to tackle indeed. We fully acknowledge having to re-train for ships you can already fly is not appealing at all.

As said in the blog, nothing is set in stone yet, we are considering various reimbursement options as this is still quite a high level change.

EDIT SO PEOPLE CAN SEE IT:

  • New destroyer and battlecruiser skills would be same rank than existing ones
  • We have a "if you could fly it before, you can fly it now" philosophy, that means properly reimbursing/giving skills not to leave people stranded in ships they could fly before the change. Again, nothing is fixed yet.


MOAR STUFF HERE FOLKS (skills, confusing picture, apology to CSM).


Narrowly avoids a 50 page rage thread at CCP. As long as you stick to this CCP, I approve. If you fail and one day I login and cannot fly a ship I can currently fly you'll have more than statues being fired at ;).

Please keep it high to get into capitals though, to many as it is when you should encourage people to fly smaller sized ships and more balanced fleets.
Leana Storm
Capital Fusion.
WE FORM V0LTA
#1062 - 2012-03-07 09:26:55 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:


No one is saying you have to retrain them. Our principle for the reimbursement here will be "if you could fly it yesterday, you can still fly it today". Ytterbium will post the further details of this once it's written up.



Please put that in the devblog. in bold. in at least 5 diffrent places. and one extra large in red, under the headline.
Kirin Falense
Some names are just stupid
#1063 - 2012-03-07 09:27:03 UTC
I approve! Although I bet it has been said before this makes the BS5 really useless for capital pilots, it would be nice if we were allowed to put those skillpoints to better use elsewhere, my two cents....
RavenNyx
Tax 'n Death
#1064 - 2012-03-07 09:29:07 UTC
this:
Quote:
You'll remove the "Battlecruiser" skill and replace it with "[RACE] Battlecruiser" skills. That's great... You did stop to include stuff like f.ex. "Angel Cruiser" or "Sansha Carrier" too, right? I mean, to avoid MAJOR inconsistencies in your idea, already at birth?


this:
Quote:
You insist on calling vessels in EvE online "ships", and I can only conclude that the above is the image you're trying to put in my head. And that's good. It gives everybody an idea of what the ship is, what it's role is, how it's armed and if it'll handle like a brick or a feather. This is information players derive from the ship category name alone, based on pictures, movies, history lessons in school or even toys... Please stay true to your original course, or make the descision to re-name/-design the entire classification scheme...


and this:
Quote:
And the skillpoint idea - what a lovely thought... I trust that you'll reimburse all my training-time on medium lasers, and the time I spent training for medium hybrids too, right? I mean, I trained medium hybrids to fly the Brutix and the Ferox and medium lasers to fly the Harbinger, and if I can no longer fly those ships, and I trained those supplementary skills for those ships.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=899625#post899625


I do hope these points will be addressed at some point, as I cannot see how the idea, as-is, can be justified otherwise.
Gravecall
Nordic Innovations
#1065 - 2012-03-07 09:29:38 UTC
So does this mean that the Rokh will be getting a large defense buff/Raven getting a defense nerf?Twisted
According to your new classes the Raven should only have an average defense whereas the Rokh should have a great one. At the moment the Raven is the mission-runners choice because it can pack almost as much damage as the Rokh while having way better defense.
Heck you could probably even resolve the issue without touching defense buffs by going after the cap generation so the Rokh can field a better active shield tank than the Raven inspite of the cap drain from it's rails.
Terazul
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1066 - 2012-03-07 09:31:40 UTC
People sure are up in arms about the whole cross-training thing.

I wonder why nobody has argued in favor of doing things the other way around? Removing racial ship skills altogether and just having "frigate", "cruiser", "battleship", etc., since that would massively decrease the required training time to be able to pilot all the races' ship variations...

Me, I really don't give a toss. I'm more hoping that ship classes other than battlecruiser actually become worth piloting in PvP. For too long, BCs have been the dominant ship class in EVE simply due to their insane cost-effectiveness. Isn't it time for a bit of change?

I mean, really, if cruisers become worth piloting over BCs, why would you even care about training BC skill again? But whatever, I see a lot of people have lots of trouble thinking laterally...
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1067 - 2012-03-07 09:35:35 UTC
RavenNyx wrote:
You'll remove the "Battlecruiser" skill and replace it with "[RACE] Battlecruiser" skills. That's great... You did stop to include stuff like f.ex. "Angel Cruiser" or "Sansha Carrier" too, right? I mean, to avoid MAJOR inconsistencies in your idea, already at birth?
What's inconsistent about it?

We already have racial cruiser skills — 2× racial cruiser = pirate cruiser. So why would they have to suddenly introduce [pirate] cruiser skills all of a sudden?
Quote:
And the skillpoint idea - what a lovely thought... I trust that you'll reimburse all my training-time on medium lasers, and the time I spent training for medium hybrids too, right?
Why would they? You'll still be able to use those skills (and ships).
wallenbergaren
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1068 - 2012-03-07 09:39:12 UTC
I still haven't heard a good reason for this BC skill change.
Certainly not one good enough to justify it. Splitting one ship skill into four different ones is a very dramatic change. It needs to be motivated by a very good reason, not "oh, we think it'd be more consistent".
tasman devil
Puritans
#1069 - 2012-03-07 09:42:15 UTC
I - for one - am cheering for this!

The same as with the name-change. Reduce illogical stuff and not to keep it just because "It was there from the get go" is a good approach.

Just keep it simple, and
please-pretty please do NOT stretch this out to infinity!! Roll it in in ONE iteration! Do not say "we will iterate on it later". It is just like me doing the laundry: I've put the stuff in the washing machine and will iterate on it later (ie. turn on the damn machine)so basically **** got done but I am still short of clean clothes...


I don't belive in reincarnation I've never believed in it in my previous lives either...
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#1070 - 2012-03-07 09:42:50 UTC
I'm not too fond of the dumbing down I see behind making ship progression more linear, and making capitals easier to get into. I approve of the tiericide, and am pretty impartial about splitting the skills into racial variants, as long as the reimbursement works out as described.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Noran Talidan
Band of Builders Inc.
#1071 - 2012-03-07 09:45:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Noran Talidan
I like this idea, really it adds much needed consistancy!

My only worry is how much is this role system going to effect the use of ships that I can already fly... (IE Armageddon, Apoc, etc) are my fitting's and play style going to have to change after 8 years to compensate?
Vahu Shamy
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#1072 - 2012-03-07 09:46:24 UTC
Finally! Good direction here CCP.
But just keep the BS V requirement for caps
Jane Bahna
Forbidden Act
#1073 - 2012-03-07 09:49:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Jane Bahna
New ship lines: need more details on how this will affect the ships .. so far nothing to comment
New Racial skills: I feel sorry for all new players, who have to train 4times more for more cross-racial training. BC skill with x6 multiplier and aprox 30 days to L V, thats 4 months instead of 1 (lolz). You need to be super-sure you want this to happen.
Caps with BS IV: Thats just stupid. That being sad, let's remind us that subcap gunnery skills (small/med/large) require L 3 of their lower versions with caps gunnery skills require large L V. So inhere are caps already different, lets keep 'em that way in ships tree as well. Or this will also change ?
Skills reimb.: I foresee huge SP boosts, I bet pro character sellers already adjusted the plans :)

keep the ideas coming :P

EDIT: with the all rebalancing ideas flying around, I would really like to see Drone skills to be adjusted finally
Tuggboat
Oneida Inc.
#1074 - 2012-03-07 09:49:49 UTC
I would like to see some discussion on why ship tiers prevent you from adding slots and also what ships would make up which ship lines and whether we need an additional line or two. Are the ship lines built around ground or navel metaphors and does it matter are some things I'd like to discuss but.

All I see is a thread about skill point balance rather than ship balance. WOuld it be ok to open up discussion of this in the ships and module section or where does it belong? General will get buried in a day and trolled to death so CCP where do we talk about the dev blog at?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1075 - 2012-03-07 09:50:45 UTC
wallenbergaren wrote:
I still haven't heard a good reason for this BC skill change.
Certainly not one good enough to justify it. Splitting one ship skill into four different ones is a very dramatic change. It needs to be motivated by a very good reason, not "oh, we think it'd be more consistent".

Consistency is a very good reason. This change also decouples a number of skill requirements to create categorical “role” and “hull” skills that combine to give you access to any one specific ship. This, in turn, makes it far easier for new players to specialise and “catch up” with older players, and the only downside is that cross-training is very slightly more costly than before — it hits the mid-to-long-term players more than anyone and simply presents a new decision point on top of the many new decisions created by the aforementioned decoupling of hull and role.
Tallian Saotome wrote:
I'm not too fond of the dumbing down I see behind making ship progression more linear, and making capitals easier to get into.
…and as a result of these increased choices and decision points, this change does the exact opposite of dumbing the game down: it makes the game smarter. It lets you plan your progression in finer detail and lets the smart player squeeze more out of the system than the dumb one.

More decisions and more consequences “smartens” the game — it does not dumb it down.
Kvikindi
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1076 - 2012-03-07 09:53:17 UTC
I'd say put all racial shipclass prerequisites to lvl V
Amarr Frigate V -> Amarr Destroyer V -> Amarr Cruiser V etc.

maybe slightly lower their rank so the total training time isn't so huge. But in general this would mean player needs so specialize/focus either in race or ship class... this way you cant just crosstrain every t1 (capital) ship in game so easily


P.S. all "high sp" toons stop whining about the bc V, ccp will figure out a reimbursement... besides.... changes (good or bad) makes this game interesting for us old farts out there :D
Noran Talidan
Band of Builders Inc.
#1077 - 2012-03-07 09:53:42 UTC
Tuggboat wrote:
All I see is a thread about skill point balance rather than ship balance. WOuld it be ok to open up discussion of this in the ships and module section or where does it belong? General will get buried in a day and trolled to death so CCP where do we talk about the dev blog at?


Exactly I am far more worried about the ships then the skills... skills can be fixed... but please be carful not to break the ships.... I like my navy geddon!!!
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1078 - 2012-03-07 09:54:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Grey Stormshadow
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Smoking Blunts wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
The skill requirement changes for destroyers and battlecruisers is very tricky to tackle indeed. We fully acknowledge having to re-train for ships you can already fly is not appealing at all.

As said in the blog, nothing is set in stone yet, we are considering various reimbursement options as this is still quite a high level change.



it not just not appealing its crazy.

pre patch i can fly all cs's and all dic's. post patch im ******. i either pick to fly a claymore or damnation or a vulture (eos is **** anyhow) and then im screwed for the next 80 odd days retraining for ships i could already fly.

you either reduce the ranks of the destroyer and bc skills so reimbursed skill points from the old cover all 4 races, or you just give people all 4 races.




We'll find a suitable reimbursement that makes everyone happy. I'm not terribly fussed about giving away a little extra if it moves we move the ship progression system into a better place.

Yea just make sure that everyone get same amount of "little extra" as in:

Player A gets reimbursed 1 million skill points from his previous skill. That get multiplied by 4 to match new multi faction skill. This = 3 million new free skill points*

Player B doesn't have the skills at all and gets 0 skills as reimbursement. That gets multiplied by 4 and is still 0. This is 3 million new skill points less than player A got*

Player A gets reimbursed 0,5 million skill points from his previous skill. That get multiplied by 4 to match new multi faction skill. This = 1,5 million new free skill points and still 1,5 million less than player A got*

*skill point amounts are fictional but provide their point in their context.

How are you going to deal with this?

1) Shall all players receive same amount of free NEW skill points?
2) ... or are you going to provide those free skill points by making the new skills 4 times faster to train?
3) ... or something else what I yet fail to see?

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#1079 - 2012-03-07 09:56:24 UTC
Tippia wrote:

More decisions and more consequences “smartens” the game — it does not dumb it down.

As I see this change, it removes choices by channeling people into a racial path, which in some cases is a VERY bad thing(think Gallente since the nano nerf) which takes considerably more effort to get out of. It also forces training of things you have no intention of using(I have dessie to 2 because I hate the class of hull), which removes choices.

Short version: Not as many choices when you train, much more painful consequences, to the point you are being punished if your races core mechanic is nerfed, or even just falls out of favor as a fleet ship.

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Jagga Spikes
Spikes Chop Shop
#1080 - 2012-03-07 09:58:05 UTC
having to retrain skills is small price for getting actually useful ships.