These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Prices should not determine ship balance, function should.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fredfredbug4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2012-04-11 22:22:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Fredfredbug4
There is a lot of talk about how a Hulk, worth anywhere from 250 to 400 mil shouldn't be able to be destroyed by ships only a few mil.

This is a really poor way to determine the balance or unbalance of a game. Logically, a 5mil cruiser should be better than a 2mil cruiser. However there is an extremely critical flaw with this argument.

It only applies when the ships perform the same function.

Take the function of a Hulk, it's a really big mining platform. It can extract a lot of ore very quickly and hold a lot of it in order to cut down on trips to and from the station. It should stay far away from the battlefield and in the safty of hi-sec or well gaurded low/null sec

Now take the function of a Thorax, it's a ship meant to get up close and deal a lot of DPS and can do a good job at blowing up ships larger than itself. It a ship that should be on the front line, camping gates and attacking others effectively in solo and gang warfare.

One ship is meant for combat, the other isn't. Ask yourself this

Why should a ship that isn't meant for combat be well protected against a ship that is meant for combat?

That is the real question here. It has little to do with price.

A long time ago Hulks, mining ships not meant for combat were able to take down frigates, destroyers, and even a few cruisers (ships meant for combat). There is a reason why CCP nerfed the feasibility of the "Battle Hulk", the ship started doing things that it wasn't meant to do.

It's not about price, it's about function. Hulks aren't meant to fight, other ships are. Ships that aren't meant to fight shouldn't stand a chance against ships that are.

This also works among other topics regarding ship balance. Many people justify the Tengu's ability to blow up many things is because they are often worth several billion dollars. While that is an important factor, the Tengu and other T3s are meant to be jacks of all trades yet masters at none, that is their function.

Discuss

Watch_ Fred Fred Frederation_ and stop [u]cryptozoologist[/u]! Fight against the brutal genocide of fictional creatures across New Eden! Is that a metaphor? Probably not, but the fru-fru- people will sure love it!
Solhild
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-04-11 22:34:01 UTC
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
There is a lot of talk about how a Hulk, worth anywhere from 250 to 400 mil shouldn't be able to be destroyed by ships only a few mil.

This is a really poor way to determine the balance or unbalance of a game. Logically, a 5mil cruiser should be better than a 2mil cruiser. However there is an extremely critical flaw with this argument.

It only applies when the ships perform the same function.

Take the function of a Hulk, it's a really big mining platform. It can extract a lot of ore very quickly and hold a lot of it in order to cut down on trips to and from the station. It should stay far away from the battlefield and in the safty of hi-sec or well gaurded low/null sec

Now take the function of a Thorax, it's a ship meant to get up close and deal a lot of DPS and can do a good job at blowing up ships larger than itself. It a ship that should be on the front line, camping gates and attacking others effectively in solo and gang warfare.

One ship is meant for combat, the other isn't. Ask yourself this

Why should a ship that isn't meant for combat be well protected against a ship that is meant for combat?

That is the real question here. It has little to do with price.

A long time ago Hulks, mining ships not meant for combat were able to take down frigates, destroyers, and even a few cruisers (ships meant for combat). There is a reason why CCP nerfed the feasibility of the "Battle Hulk", the ship started doing things that it wasn't meant to do.

It's not about price, it's about function. Hulks aren't meant to fight, other ships are. Ships that aren't meant to fight shouldn't stand a chance against ships that are.

This also works among other topics regarding ship balance. Many people justify the Tengu's ability to blow up many things is because they are often worth several billion dollars. While that is an important factor, the Tengu and other T3s are meant to be jacks of all trades yet masters at none, that is their function.

Discuss


Several billion dollars is an expensive Tengu, how many PLEX is that?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#3 - 2012-04-11 22:37:24 UTC
Yes. Cost is not a balancing factor because it cannot counteract imbalance — be it in the positive or negative direction.
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#4 - 2012-04-11 22:47:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahega Amielden
EDIT: I had another reply typed up, then I realized that you're just suffering from a gigantic miscommunication.

No one is arguing that hulks should be able to 1v1 combat ships and win. People are arguing that they should be able to protect themselves from ganks they have no chance to prevent. There's a difference. A blockade runner is not going to 1v1 any combat ship and win, but it sure as **** is great at staying alive.

The cost of the hulk is relevant because it directly determines how much ISK and time people are willing to invest in suicide ganking it. As the cost of the ship goes up, its value to gankers goes up - no one suicide ganks newbies in t1-fit rifters.
Fredfredbug4
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-04-11 23:18:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Fredfredbug4
Kahega Amielden wrote:
EDIT: I had another reply typed up, then I realized that you're just suffering from a gigantic miscommunication.

No one is arguing that hulks should be able to 1v1 combat ships and win. People are arguing that they should be able to protect themselves from ganks they have no chance to prevent. There's a difference. A blockade runner is not going to 1v1 any combat ship and win, but it sure as **** is great at staying alive.

The cost of the hulk is relevant because it directly determines how much ISK and time people are willing to invest in suicide ganking it. As the cost of the ship goes up, its value to gankers goes up - no one suicide ganks newbies in t1-fit rifters.



I never implied that people think they should 1v1 combat ships.

Quote:
Ships that aren't meant to fight shouldn't stand a chance against ships that are.


"Stand a chance" doesn't necessarily mean they should fight off other ships, but have a good chance at surviving.

Also back to that whole function thing, a blockade runner is MEANT to avoid getting killed. It's function is to escape gatecamps with ease. It stands a chance at survival because it's meant to.

There is no indication that a mining ship should be able to survive an encounter with a ship trying to blow it up.

The value of a Hulk to suicide gankers has little to do with the topic at hand. What I am talking about is balance, not profit. Of course people are going to try and blow up the more expensive stuff. What people try to justify is that a 300 mil ship should not be blown up by a 30 mil ship.

Quote:

Several billion dollars is an expensive Tengu, how many PLEX is that?


Assuming several is 3 to 7 units, anywhere from 6 to 14 PLEX, give or take at current prices.

Watch_ Fred Fred Frederation_ and stop [u]cryptozoologist[/u]! Fight against the brutal genocide of fictional creatures across New Eden! Is that a metaphor? Probably not, but the fru-fru- people will sure love it!
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#6 - 2012-04-12 00:13:35 UTC
In RL people pay a lot of real money for cars that they think are "saving the planet" but the production of which has a larger "carbon footprint" than taking an old muscle car and overhauling it. They also think they save on gas when battery replacement down the road means gas will have to be 12 bucks a gallon until that point.


So, since symbolism over substance rules the real world, why would people handle things any differently in a game?


Just think, in EvE, you are supposed to take responsibility for your actions and understand the idea of consequences, hence the need that said Hulks should be tanked, but alas they are not.

Instead people just want a 'higher authority" (CCP) to change things for them like a bunch of crybabies - just like RL.


EvE is getting too real.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
stoicfaux
#7 - 2012-04-12 00:54:41 UTC
Yes, but... why can't Hulks be adapted to current circumstances? If ganking is a problem, then ship designers would be fairly quick to offer a tankier Hulk, or a less capable, but cheaper Hulk. As it stands, we're all kind of reliant on CCP to design the ships instead of letting the market (and the limits of Eve physics and engineering if they were modeled) decide how the sand in the sandbox should be arranged.

Methinks miners need a T3-ish style ship.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Aggressive Nutmeg
#8 - 2012-04-12 01:03:22 UTC
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
Why should a ship that isn't meant for combat be well protected against a ship that is meant for combat?

Because people keep attacking them, perhaps?

Never make eye contact with someone while eating a banana.
Himnos Altar
An Errant Venture
#9 - 2012-04-12 01:07:47 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Yes, but... why can't Hulks be adapted to current circumstances? If ganking is a problem, then ship designers would be fairly quick to offer a tankier Hulk, or a less capable, but cheaper Hulk.




You....do realize that that ship is a Covetor, right?
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-04-12 01:10:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaal Erit
stoicfaux wrote:
Yes, but... why can't Hulks be adapted to current circumstances? If ganking is a problem, then ship designers would be fairly quick to offer a tankier Hulk, or a less capable, but cheaper Hulk. As it stands, we're all kind of reliant on CCP to design the ships instead of letting the market (and the limits of Eve physics and engineering if they were modeled) decide how the sand in the sandbox should be arranged.

Methinks miners need a T3-ish style ship.



Ganking is not a problem. Ganking is a solution.

Compare the hulk tank to a covetor tank. Is it insanely better? There. There is you 200m worth of tank. T2 does not mean you get a free wtfomgbbq tank. Lots of T2 ships have a terrible tank, in fact a lot of T2 ships have LESS base HP than their T1 counterparts. I kill T2 intys in a rifter all the time, I can take down some HACs with a thorax no problem. I can kill a 500m absolution with a t1 battleship while barely trying.

In fact to keep the Hulk balanced with HACs and such, the Hulk would need a NERF of base hp to be consistent. Learn game mechanics and learn to play.
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#11 - 2012-04-12 01:11:46 UTC
No ship in EVE should be defenseless. You are a legitimate target the second you undock. Barges are defensless. Even a T1 Industrial has enough low slots, Med slots and PG to counter a Solo Kamikaze in EVE. A Hulk, Mackinaw and thier t1 counterparts do not. It isn't so much that they cost 300 mill, it's that they die far too easy.

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#12 - 2012-04-12 01:17:24 UTC
Ioci wrote:
No ship in EVE should be defenseless. You are a legitimate target the second you undock. Barges are defensless. Even a T1 Industrial has enough low slots, Med slots and PG to counter a Solo Kamikaze in EVE. A Hulk, Mackinaw and thier t1 counterparts do not. It isn't so much that they cost 300 mill, it's that they die far too easy.


Hulk gets over a covetor

Shield resists:
37.5% EM over 0%
65% Exp over 50%
62.5% kin over 40%
50% therm over 20%
+3 mid slots
+50% more powergrid
2x the capacitor
2x the shield hp
+35% more hull hp


Sure sounds defenseless to me. And oh yeah T1 industrials use those low slots for tank all the time, riiiight. Have you ever played EVE before? Or do you just train skills and whine?
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
#13 - 2012-04-12 01:23:36 UTC
Vaal Erit wrote:
Ioci wrote:
No ship in EVE should be defenseless. You are a legitimate target the second you undock. Barges are defensless. Even a T1 Industrial has enough low slots, Med slots and PG to counter a Solo Kamikaze in EVE. A Hulk, Mackinaw and thier t1 counterparts do not. It isn't so much that they cost 300 mill, it's that they die far too easy.


Hulk gets over a covetor

Shield resists:
37.5% EM over 0%
65% Exp over 50%
62.5% kin over 40%
50% therm over 20%
+3 mid slots
+50% more powergrid
2x the capacitor
2x the shield hp
+35% more hull hp


Sure sounds defenseless to me. And oh yeah T1 industrials use those low slots for tank all the time, riiiight. Have you ever played EVE before? Or do you just train skills and whine?


Comparing garbage to garbagedoesn't make them good. it's lipstick on a pig.
EHP and flat HP don't account for the Alpha produced by ships in EVE.

You seem to like flaming and trying to some how push peoples buttons but have you ever actually undocked a Hulk?
2 low slots, one goes to the DCU.
Less PG than a tristan

Sig rad of a BattleCruiser,
Align time of a BattleShip.

You cant tank a Hulk.

R.I.P. Vile Rat
Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#14 - 2012-04-12 01:27:07 UTC
how about role and lore? ORE designed the exhumers, ORE is a 0.0 NPC corp, therefore ORE would have tanked those ships more.

Fix exhumer tanks... for great lore justice!


Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2012-04-12 01:28:41 UTC
Fredfredbug4 wrote:
There is a lot of talk about how a Hulk, worth anywhere from 250 to 400 mil shouldn't be able to be destroyed by ships only a few mil.

This is a really poor way to determine the balance or unbalance of a game. Logically, a 5mil cruiser should be better than a 2mil cruiser. However there is an extremely critical flaw with this argument.

It only applies when the ships perform the same function.

Take the function of a Hulk, it's a really big mining platform. It can extract a lot of ore very quickly and hold a lot of it in order to cut down on trips to and from the station. It should stay far away from the battlefield and in the safty of hi-sec or well gaurded low/null sec

Now take the function of a Thorax, it's a ship meant to get up close and deal a lot of DPS and can do a good job at blowing up ships larger than itself. It a ship that should be on the front line, camping gates and attacking others effectively in solo and gang warfare.

One ship is meant for combat, the other isn't. Ask yourself this

Why should a ship that isn't meant for combat be well protected against a ship that is meant for combat?

That is the real question here. It has little to do with price.

A long time ago Hulks, mining ships not meant for combat were able to take down frigates, destroyers, and even a few cruisers (ships meant for combat). There is a reason why CCP nerfed the feasibility of the "Battle Hulk", the ship started doing things that it wasn't meant to do.

It's not about price, it's about function. Hulks aren't meant to fight, other ships are. Ships that aren't meant to fight shouldn't stand a chance against ships that are.

This also works among other topics regarding ship balance. Many people justify the Tengu's ability to blow up many things is because they are often worth several billion dollars. While that is an important factor, the Tengu and other T3s are meant to be jacks of all trades yet masters at none, that is their function.

Discuss



I agree. To use a real world analogy, its like saying a 200 million dollar passenger jet should be able to ourperform a 100 million dollar Fighter Jet just because it cost 100 million dollars more. Outside of the fact that they both can fly, they perform two radically differnt roles and really cant be compared.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB
Grumpymunky
Monkey Steals The Peach
#16 - 2012-04-12 01:33:39 UTC
Denidil wrote:
ORE designed the exhumers, ORE is a 0.0 NPC corp, therefore ORE designed them without suicide gankers in mind.
P

Post with your monkey.

Thread locked due to lack of pants.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#17 - 2012-04-12 01:37:50 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Yes, but... why can't Hulks be adapted to current circumstances?
They can. People just choose not to.
stoicfaux
#18 - 2012-04-12 01:46:39 UTC
Speaking of prices, instead of isk price balancing, how about we just increase the cost of a gank? You gank in high-sec and you basically become kill on sight to that faction/corp's sentry guns until you pay restitution plus a fine?

Being able to gank someone and then waiting out the timer to go rat up your sec status isn't exactly a solid, well thought out crime prevention policy, no?

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#19 - 2012-04-12 01:48:32 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Speaking of prices, instead of isk price balancing, how about we just increase the cost of a gank?
This has already happened. Why does it need to happen again so soon?
stoicfaux
#20 - 2012-04-12 01:56:38 UTC
Tippia wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
Yes, but... why can't Hulks be adapted to current circumstances?
They can. People just choose not to.

Meh, I'm talking about some enterprising young engineering corp retro-fitting a battleship hull into a mining ship. Something a bit more RP/"realistic" than simply fitting tank mods on a CCP stock ship.

It would be pretty cool if we could design our own ships from scratch. Downsides would be designing the limits and trade-offs into such a system, min-maxing, server load, etc..

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
123Next page