These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Lili Lu
#1581 - 2012-03-08 20:53:14 UTC
Minabunny wrote:
Now cut all skill training times by 50% and it will be perfect.

Excellent troll post. Thanks P
Aphoxema G
Khushakor Clan
#1582 - 2012-03-08 20:58:54 UTC
What I see here isn't really proposing one frustrating thing, it's proposing one thing that makes the ugly ducklings find their lost swan siblings and another thing that is kind of infuriating because it doesn't really seem to make any sense.

Ship roles balance on a triangle of defense, offense and mobility to help "lesser" T1s pull their weight in the valuable minerals that have otherwise been wasted on them is a wonderful idea. I'd love to see the Bantams and the Scythes matter for once.

That digs deeply here is the arguable necessity in restructuring the way we train (as in, wait) to use non tech-1 ships. If we're going for homogeneity, it would be practical to the players to eliminate racial training entirely. What isn't practical is dictating a place for things the players have already long decided.

However, if we're going to go with racial specialization, please at least make Racial Destroyer a 1x skill and Racial Battlecruiser a 2x or 3x skill. These ships really are just frigate +1 or cruiser +1, they still rely on small and medium sized rigs and modules (with the exception of BC3s) and their prices scale up fairly well with their fittings.
Mukuro Gravedigger
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1583 - 2012-03-08 21:00:16 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Unless something changed from CCP Ytterbium's post on the matter, linked in the op, why would you believe it to be different from what was stated there? As far as missing out, if what is granted is based on ones current capabilities and choices, it wouldn't be through any fault of CCP if you missed out. That aside, the static number of skill points should really be irrelevant to the discussion IMHO.


Unless I am misunderstanding...

At the moment, with both Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills, I can fly any of the four racial varieties of ships. But after the change, I will need the lesser ship classes (frigate and cruiser) trained to fly the same racial varieties I can fly now. So how will CCP decide which skills to grant to players? A blanket case where everyone gets all four racial types equivalent to their current trained level? Or depending upon your trained lower class ships whether you are given one or more skill point sets? That is, since I only have Minmatar trained, I will be given the racial variety only in skill points compared to one that trained everything who will get four times the amount of skill points.

Yes, skill points in the long run does not matter. But whereas right now I can take a Ferox and turn it into a gas mining ship, once this change goes through, if I decide I want that Ferox, I will need to train from frigate on up - spending time for something I can do right now. I will not have a grandfather clause stating I was able to fly the Ferox before but suddenly ~forgot~ now.

As for the dev's post on the matter, again I have not read the whole thread through, but from what I have seen - everyone will get everything from today into tomorrow to "we're not sure how we'll redistribute skill points". So call me a bit skeptical.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1584 - 2012-03-08 21:00:40 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
You are looking at it from a different direction, that being number of choices. I'm looking at it from sp requirements to get into command ships or capitals where the changes are decidedly dumbing down.

I have to say this statement genuinely sums up something I truly don't understand. How is it that we've made the association that time sinks = intelligence. In the case of capitol ships, what is it that is expected to happen during the ~25 days of BS V to make a pilot more competent, that wouldn't happen during the time they had to train all the other prerequisites associated with flying those ships? In the case of command ships, time to get them in more than one race is increasing, isn't it? If that is the case I'm not sure what the issue is there.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#1585 - 2012-03-08 21:06:30 UTC
Quote:
You argue with premises that aren't proven. "a good idea" according to what? Just because you think it's a good idea?


No, my point was that you were inferring that because the idea came from the "powers that be" that they were automaticially not worthy of consideration, and anyone agreeing with those ideas was doing so because of their source.

In this you are, of course, incorrect.

A good idea is a good idea no matter where it comes from, this is simple truth regardless of what idea's are being discussed.

Making the insinuations you did is simply trollish and undermines any legitimate points you might have made.

I think I'll let Tippia explain the realities of what your new choices would mean, and why... assuming Tip feels the need to lay it all out again.

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

Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1586 - 2012-03-08 21:06:49 UTC
Mukuro Gravedigger wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Unless something changed from CCP Ytterbium's post on the matter, linked in the op, why would you believe it to be different from what was stated there? As far as missing out, if what is granted is based on ones current capabilities and choices, it wouldn't be through any fault of CCP if you missed out. That aside, the static number of skill points should really be irrelevant to the discussion IMHO.


Unless I am misunderstanding...

At the moment, with both Battlecruiser and Destroyer skills, I can fly any of the four racial varieties of ships. But after the change, I will need the lesser ship classes (frigate and cruiser) trained to fly the same racial varieties I can fly now. So how will CCP decide which skills to grant to players? A blanket case where everyone gets all four racial types equivalent to their current trained level? Or depending upon your trained lower class ships whether you are given one or more skill point sets? That is, since I only have Minmatar trained, I will be given the racial variety only in skill points compared to one that trained everything who will get four times the amount of skill points.

Yes, skill points in the long run does not matter. But whereas right now I can take a Ferox and turn it into a gas mining ship, once this change goes through, if I decide I want that Ferox, I will need to train from frigate on up - spending time for something I can do right now. I will not have a grandfather clause stating I was able to fly the Ferox before but suddenly ~forgot~ now.

As for the dev's post on the matter, again I have not read the whole thread through, but from what I have seen - everyone will get everything from today into tomorrow to "we're not sure how we'll redistribute skill points". So call me a bit skeptical.

I must be wrong regarding the prerequisites for BC's, but i thought they required cruiser 3 of the respective race to pilot, so for a ferox one would have to have Caldari Cruiser 3 which required Caldari Frigate 4 anyways. So, were I designing the system I'd provide the racial BC skills at the level the BC skill was trained to for each race a person had cruiser 3 in. Last I read and understood one may get all 4, but I'd have to double check as I don't recall specific clarification on that point. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
FloppieTheBanjoClown
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#1587 - 2012-03-08 21:15:09 UTC
As of right now, you get BC 5 for two things: the max out your T1 BC stats, or to fly command ships. I'm mostly concerned with the latter.

Command ships are already woefully underpowered for the skills they require. They are upstaged almost completely by T3s that require half the time investment for command skills. One redeeming factor of them today is that once I have BC5, I have access to any race's command ships at the same time I have access to the T2 cruisers.

What's worse is how unfair this is going to be for those people who DON'T have BC5 when this is released and find themselves having to train it four times while I only had to train it once. I certainly appreciate the free SP this will give me, but it's hardly fair to newer players who haven't had a year or two to get to the point that BC5 is an worthwhile skill to have.

Founding member of the Belligerent Undesirables movement.

Random Womble
Emo Rangers
Electric Monkey Overlords
#1588 - 2012-03-08 21:20:00 UTC
I dont like the BC and destroyer skill changes. For various reasons but i also think it will discourage people from trying other races and different play styles which brings me on to my main bug bear (and forcing people to train destroyers when there is only 1 per race is just daft).

While balancing is never easy and some ships are used to a lesser or greater extent that is always going to be the case as different play styles (influenced by mechanics, lag and so on) become more or less popular. The changes will not stop this happening even if they go through however they may reduce the degree to which it happens and that in fact points to stagnation for the game which is a bad thing. The change will also make all the races to a larger extent much more homogeneous again something that is not good. Finally it destroys the creativity in pvp EVE. Occasionally people will take mediocre ships and make them work in new ways. Something that is fun and challenging and is best seen in the alliance tournament (which is admittedly like conducting a drug test in a lab vs in real world trials).

Don't make the game bland and predictable.

Chaos must rule
Aren Dar
EVE University
Ivy League
#1589 - 2012-03-08 21:31:30 UTC
Random Womble wrote:
I dont like the BC and destroyer skill changes. For various reasons but i also think it will discourage people from trying other races and different play styles which brings me on to my main bug bear (and forcing people to train destroyers when there is only 1 per race is just daft)


In the absolute best case everyone will start to gravitate towards one particular race, because balance is very hard to do correctly and CCP have never ever got balance correct (if you take their meaning of making every ship of a given level equally desirable). I imagine it will further increase the monocultures of null-sec fleets.

Or you can assume that CCP has discovered a group of developers with a mutant gene that enables them to do what they have never been able to do in the past.
Dormax
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1590 - 2012-03-08 21:34:30 UTC
Random Womble wrote:
I dont like the BC and destroyer skill changes. For various reasons but i also think it will discourage people from trying other races and different play styles which brings me on to my main bug bear (and forcing people to train destroyers when there is only 1 per race is just daft).

While balancing is never easy and some ships are used to a lesser or greater extent that is always going to be the case as different play styles (influenced by mechanics, lag and so on) become more or less popular. The changes will not stop this happening even if they go through however they may reduce the degree to which it happens and that in fact points to stagnation for the game which is a bad thing. The change will also make all the races to a larger extent much more homogeneous again something that is not good. Finally it destroys the creativity in pvp EVE. Occasionally people will take mediocre ships and make them work in new ways. Something that is fun and challenging and is best seen in the alliance tournament (which is admittedly like conducting a drug test in a lab vs in real world trials).

Don't make the game bland and predictable.

Chaos must rule


/sign

If I wanted predictable I'd be playing WOW or TOR. OK, so smart bombing drakes and disco beam canes are unlikely, and probably stupid... but you never know... all depends on how they are used and the ingenuity of the pilot. I've seen stranger killmails!
Aph3xus
Woopatang
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#1591 - 2012-03-08 21:40:34 UTC
I support the re-worked ship skill tree.
Lili Lu
#1592 - 2012-03-08 21:41:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Ranger 1 wrote:
No, my point was that you were inferring that because the idea came from the "powers that be" that they were automaticially not worthy of consideration, and anyone agreeing with those ideas was doing so because of their source.

In this you are, of course, incorrect.

A good idea is a good idea no matter where it comes from, this is simple truth regardless of what idea's are being discussed.

Making the insinuations you did is simply trollish and undermines any legitimate points you might have made.

I think I'll let Tippia explain the realities of what your new choices would mean, and why... assuming Tip feels the need to lay it all out again.

Lol Bolded where you aren't getting it. You say it is a good idea, therefore it must be? Again, this is your opinion, and mine differs. Neither is objectively true, still just subjectively true to each of us. You continue to "insinuate" that your favorable opinion of the changes means they are inherently good.

"my new choices" what are you talking about? I amd not introducing anything new. Instead I'm arguing against most of the proposed changes, except for the proposed replacing of the tiers with roles, which has been a long existing request on the threads (notice I didn't say majority request), and the proposed racial destroyer and BC skills are fine as they will actually increase overall sp investment in order to progress. It seems this is important to Tippia, to force choices to be made, fine. But removing skill reqs for some tech II and captial ships is a mistake, imo. Easy goals are not necessarilly better. What has been Eve's strength is the quest, not the summiting.

As to the person who says what's one 30 day train for BS 5 matter (sorry tired of creating another tab and quoting). Well you see, it's not just the 30 days. It is the perception of difficulty. If that goes then way too many people become focused on Titan or bust. Regardless, every diminution, no matter it's size in the totality of training time, just makes the supercap proliferation problem worse.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1593 - 2012-03-08 21:57:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Lili Lu wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
No, my point was that you were inferring that because the idea came from the "powers that be" that they were automaticially not worthy of consideration, and anyone agreeing with those ideas was doing so because of their source.

In this you are, of course, incorrect.

A good idea is a good idea no matter where it comes from, this is simple truth regardless of what idea's are being discussed.

Making the insinuations you did is simply trollish and undermines any legitimate points you might have made.

I think I'll let Tippia explain the realities of what your new choices would mean, and why... assuming Tip feels the need to lay it all out again.

Lol Bolded where you aren't getting it. You say it is a good idea, therefore it must be? Again, this is your opinion, and mine differs. Neither is objectively true, still just subjectively true to each of us. You continue to "insinuate" that your favorable opinion of the changes means they are inherently good.

"my new choices" what are you talking about? I amd not introducing anything new. Instead I'm arguing against most of the proposed changes, except for the proposed replacing of the tiers with roles, which has been a long existing request on the threads (notice I didn't say majority request), and the proposed racial destroyer and BC skills are fine as they will actually increase overall sp investment in order to progress. It seems this is important to Tippia, to force choices to be made, fine. But removing skill reqs for some tech II and captial ships is a mistake.

As to the person who says what's one 30 day train for BS 5 matter (sorry tired of creating another tab and quoting). Well you see, it's not just the 30 days. It is the perception of difficulty. If that goes then way too many people become focused on Titan or bust. Regardless, every diminution, no matter it's size in the totality of training time, just makes the supercap proliferation problem worse.

I guess I'm missing the source of that perception of difficulty. Mainly due to the fact that training is very straightforward, but if time is actually being viewed as a barrier to proliferation of caps/supercaps then we are long past their effective period of 30 days and proliferation should be expected. Since this method is neither difficult or intelligent and doesn't accomplish the stated goal of preventing proliferation, why keep it? It we just want a time sink, lets be honest and say that, but if were talking about having some specific benefit to the game, I'm not seeing it.

Edit: And if we do see alot of people go "titan or bust" who aren't prepared as pilots to do so, we end up with alot of dead titans, which is a good thing for just about everyone.
CyberGh0st
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1594 - 2012-03-08 22:07:20 UTC
Revman Zim wrote:
Patient 2428190 wrote:
I love how you are going to give everybody who currently has Destroyers V and Battlecruisers V 6,144,000 skillpoints out of thin air.

You guys are truly idiotic.



What would be TRULY idiotic is for any current player, that has this knowledge, not to immediately start skilling Desy V and BC V.

I don't know how this will all play out, but CCP is basically telling you what to do to benefit from this, but only if you act.

I personally already have Desy V and BC V, however, I only have the the Amarr frig and cruiser skills to support flying those Destroyers and BC's.

Only 6 days to get the other 3 races frig and cruiser skills up to support flying their respective BC. Just in case....

If you are reading this and not preparing for the change, then you are the idiot.

Of course 4 months from now when they abandon this line of thinking there will be another 70+ page ragethread about how everyone got screwed.



You made me lol, thanks :p
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#1595 - 2012-03-08 22:34:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
I see potential problems with reimbursement.

1. Skill points before changeover ≠ skill points after changeover.

2. Disparity between skill points given based on current abilities, as skill level progression is not linear.

You'd be penalized if you didn't already train Battlecruisers 5 and Destroyers to 5.

Skill points in Battlecruisers 1 <<<< Skill points in four [racial] Battlecruiser 1
Skill points in Battlecruisers 5 <<<<<<<<<< Skill points in four [racial] Battlecruiser 5
Skill points in four [racial] Battlecruisers 1 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Skill points in four [racial] Battlecruiser 5
Martineth
Sihars Little Industries
#1596 - 2012-03-08 22:41:43 UTC
CCP is about to make one of the most common mistakes that game developers on MMO's are doing, but unike a handflull of them they think they ought too cause time has cought up with them. Rebalancing ships my big shiny greek Buttweiser.

You find cyclones scythe's desies and the lot obsolete? Yes they are. But they are part of a history that served us and served us well. Eve has a privillege only a handfull of MMO's has ever had. It matured, so did its content and so do its players. There is no need to rebalance an old cyclone to give it some more use. Its time is over, let people fly it like an old car model is driven.

We got the right to preserve what is a nearly 10 year history. Out with new Tiers and let us choose what we like.

Dont take my word cause i say it, HILMAR did as well. In last or overlast fanfest a player asked him if it is possible to make eve items more basic and condensed cause he was against the plethora of items in game. Hilmar replied that the tools are given for players to use and we choose-vote for out items by choosing or neglecting an item. True sandbox.

But.... you want to give old hulls a new polish right? OK here it is how i think it should be done.

e.g, a Cyclone. Players should have the right to take the basic hull and send it over to an NPC corporation that will enchance it slightly on certain fileds. Brutors would give it some more gunpower. Creodron some more drone cababilities. Sisters of EvE some more cargo etc. Make some of these echancements stackable up to a degree, make the ship unsellable and make it unique in a way. Make it smt like a new F16 block 52 adv. Same hull as the 1976 F16 but with new capabilities. Good and better cyclone but under no circumstance a better ship then a tier 2 or tier 3 ship. Its time has passed.

If we dont respect the fact that in our universe old and obsolete ships are rare yet here to show to new players how it was in the good old days we miss th chance to point out a simple fact that no other game in my humble opinion can with the same degree.

To show to new players we got roots, we got history and by stickign around you are participating into a better eve. So lets roll out these tier 4 BC's and tier 2 desies and let the older models become obslete. It is NOT a condition. It is a rightfully earned privillege of Ageing. Let them age with grace and respect them by letting them as they are.

They served, and served us well.
Jake Rivers
New Planetary Order
#1597 - 2012-03-08 22:46:06 UTC
Seems like a lot of rage in here. Ship balancing and fixing the ship tree has been long over due. This is a great step in the right direction. I look forward to this change.
Velarra
#1598 - 2012-03-08 22:54:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Velarra
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We have been following this thread closely and compiled a Q&A list to the most commonly asked questions, we hope this helps a bit.


  • Q: can we opt out for skills we don't want during the reimbursement process?

  • A: well, again, it depends on how it is done. We may just bluntly give all four variants at V if you had battlecruiser V for example, or maybe require that you also add the relevant Cruiser skill trained at level 3 to be eligible. On the latter case, just don't train the cruiser 3 skill, and you should not receive the new racial battlecruiser at 5. Not sure why one would do that however, it's like skipping free candy or cake while visiting your grandma.

    Example:
  • If we go for option 1: you will get Amarr, Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar Battlecruiser skills at 5 if you previously had the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5.
  • If we go for option 2: you will get Amarr Battlecruiser skill at 5 only if you previously fulfilled all conditions to fly Amarr Battlecruisers, which means having the generic Battlecruiser skill at 5, PLUS the Amarr Cruiser at 3.

  • To remind it again, there are other options to consider, but no matter which one which choose, you won't lose anything out of the skill reimbursement plan.



In response to your not being sure why the noted concern:

There is a certain sense of acute gratification from building an extremely focused character.

If you've built a specialized single race alt or two over several years both as functional characters and in particular as exercises in execution...you've completely ruined the lengthy focus and effort invested in the character once an off-race specific skill is added to the sheet. it's a bit like throwing the entire character 'concept' out the window.

If you want examples of this take a look at my accounts & characters.

I'll likewise add it's for this same precise reason, i'd love to be able to strictly train "pirate faction" Frigate, Cruiser & Battleship skills without cross-racial skill requirements to fly 'em. For instance, i'd love to build a true pirate starter character that can only fly angel ships without access to Minmatar / Gallente. If you wish to balance this with more/less training time, cost of skill books, etc... That'd be fine, run with whatever works for balance.
Voith
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1599 - 2012-03-08 23:18:33 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
No, my point was that you were inferring that because the idea came from the "powers that be" that they were automaticially not worthy of consideration, and anyone agreeing with those ideas was doing so because of their source.

In this you are, of course, incorrect.

A good idea is a good idea no matter where it comes from, this is simple truth regardless of what idea's are being discussed.

Making the insinuations you did is simply trollish and undermines any legitimate points you might have made.

I think I'll let Tippia explain the realities of what your new choices would mean, and why... assuming Tip feels the need to lay it all out again.

Lol Bolded where you aren't getting it. You say it is a good idea, therefore it must be? Again, this is your opinion, and mine differs. Neither is objectively true, still just subjectively true to each of us. You continue to "insinuate" that your favorable opinion of the changes means they are inherently good.

"my new choices" what are you talking about? I amd not introducing anything new. Instead I'm arguing against most of the proposed changes, except for the proposed replacing of the tiers with roles, which has been a long existing request on the threads (notice I didn't say majority request), and the proposed racial destroyer and BC skills are fine as they will actually increase overall sp investment in order to progress. It seems this is important to Tippia, to force choices to be made, fine. But removing skill reqs for some tech II and captial ships is a mistake, imo. Easy goals are not necessarilly better. What has been Eve's strength is the quest, not the summiting.

As to the person who says what's one 30 day train for BS 5 matter (sorry tired of creating another tab and quoting). Well you see, it's not just the 30 days. It is the perception of difficulty. If that goes then way too many people become focused on Titan or bust. Regardless, every diminution, no matter it's size in the totality of training time, just makes the supercap proliferation problem worse.

Training time isn't what limits supercaps.

It takes years to be able to fly a supercap or even a capital well. Shaving 30 days off that isn't going to suddenly make people jump into a supercap.
L'Acuto
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1600 - 2012-03-08 23:27:17 UTC
Why not make all of the ship skills (frigate, destroyer, cruiser, battle cruiser, battleship, carrier, dreadnaught, etc) generic and have the racial skills (amarr, caldari, gallente, and minmatar starship command) complementary. If you're worried about skill point allocation you could divide up the racial flavors into starship command, advanced starship command (for tech2 and tech3), and capital starship command.