Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1069
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 19:13:00 -
[31] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:No - eve isn't dying yet again.
However, Dust has proven to be a total failure as predicted.
Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.
I personally absolutely support Eve as I think that Eve is the only true MMO due to being single-sharded and having a mostly player driven economy, but recent balance passes are insulting to older players to say the least.
Is that contributed to Dust failing or is Eve itself failing due to bad balancing decisions related to Dusts failing?
Discuss.
And yes, in case you're mentally challenged, of course it's me failing and you should apply to my corp for that conclusion.
I get where you're coming from, you speaker of truth. |
Evei Shard
220
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 20:04:00 -
[32] - Quote
I think CCP would have been better off if they'd laughed at the individual that proposed DUST and just focused on Eve and that other game that seems to be operating on the "SoonGäó" timetable. If they'd done that, maybe WoD would be a lot further forward.
The devs have been working their asses off, but as was seen with Incarna, it's the top level that doesn't know wtf they are doing. Putting all your eggs in one basket is a bad thing, but start with one, get it working, then start a second one, get it working, and so on. CCP has one working game, but instead of working on WoD as a second, they had to go and start a third before WoD was remotely done. Personally, I hope the people who invested in DUST lost big time financially. CCP needs to stop trying to be EA Games, and start trying to be CCP. Profit favors the prepared |
Barron Hammerstrike
RISK Inc.
36
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 21:32:00 -
[33] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:The OP is right.
Some T1 ships have been buffed way too far. The Incursis and Vexor tanking abilities are over the top now. Nothing of equivalent size and Tier can 1v1 some of the fits going around now for those ships.
The ancillary repper modules were not properly taken into account with the Tiercide changes and have almost broken the game.
And Dust should have been great but CCP just keep pushing people away from it.
Apart from the poor decision to make it console based (Hope they fired the moron who came up with that genius idea) - Most people who dumped all their SP into a particular fit were screwed over in a patch a few weeks ago forcing them to stop playing while the passive SP catches up to allow their fits again. Or They could grind to the SP cap for 3 weeks to get the SP but no one with 1/2 a brain would grind for stuff they could already previously use in a console FPS.
It seems that it was an attempt/scam to get people to buy the SP boosters that backfired on CCP and rightly so.
Most like myself found their entire fits in dust to now be no longer usable. I just stopped playing Dust at that point and I am an eve player used to CCP's poor judgement and lack of understanding of their own player base. Imagine how the console kiddies would have felt logging in to find their suits and fits useless.
I have no urge to return to Dust. It is pointless trying to progress in it when you might have that progress taken away in a patch. Dust had potential but deserves to die just for not being what it was advertised as - there is no link between the games except the orbital strike mechanic which is not interesting in any way.
Epic. there is no old system anymore |
Bloody Slave
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
6
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 21:53:00 -
[34] - Quote
I could not fly that UBER T1 frigates or cruiser with my 70k+ toons anymore?
Applying to your Corp as soon I find a way to finish this tutorial I started in 2006, it will take some time though. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2161
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 21:56:00 -
[35] - Quote
Joan Greywind wrote:
Now your argument that higher skill characters should be better at everything (that is what I took from it anyways) is also wrong. EVE developers have always been stressing that if you specialize you will always be able to reach the same effectiveness of a higher skilled player . More skill points will give you more options but will not give you a permanent advantage over newer players, and that is a very good game mechanic (imo).
A very well-considered post here - however I'd like to point out that I never mentioned a higher SP player should be better at everything.
There should be incentives to gain those SP and ship stats that make T2 ships worth the training time and hull cost - currently, I can't see them and the HAC balance pass suggests there won't be any.
Yes - the eagle got buffed - I can fly eagles maxed on the two higher SP chars - did I buy one? No - because my noob alt can fly a Naga at pretty much all V skills.
For the same reason, I never bothered to even buy an interceptor, AF, EAF, HAC or Recon skillbook on the noob alt (made the mistake to buy a BS skillbook because I wrongly hoped they'd get buffed instead of just being shuffled a little).
It's just better to have a noob alt and let yourself get podded home for free and reship 5 times for the cost of one T2 counterpart that's in most cases not even marginally better than the T1 version.
All in all, I was very enthusiastic about rebalance initially, however I didn't expect the current sellout purely serving new players, rendering my older characters just less cost efficient versions of what I trained in a year - and the latter character is running out of things to train for because there's nothing on the horizon even worth considering to train for.
I contribute said sellout to the money sink dust was and the following consequence of eve devs being halted to drag in new players at all cost. You know... morons. |
Tetsuo Tsukaya
Pixel Navigators
77
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 22:08:00 -
[36] - Quote
Maybe you'd like to share which T1 frigs will beat their T2 counterparts that in your opinion are no better than their t1 counterparts.
Specifically, let me know which T1 frigs are gonna outbrawl a dual MASB hawk that reps 400DPS before overheat, or an enyo that does 420DPS. |
Spurty
912
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 22:10:00 -
[37] - Quote
Tiny / Small number of silly huge sized blue listing entities have far more to do with the deadness than a FPS tie in
--- GÇ£If you think this Universe is bad, you should see some of the others.GÇ¥ GÇò Philip K. **** |
Incindir Mauser
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
225
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 00:30:00 -
[38] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:
Is that contributed to Dust failing or is Eve itself failing due to bad balancing decisions related to Dusts failing?
Discuss.
And yes, in case you're mentally challenged, of course it's me failing and you should apply to my corp for that conclusion.
DUST 514 is...
I'm having a hard time actually describing how bad it is at the moment. I'm at something of a loss for words. I play both Eve and DUST, so... yeah.
DUST 514 is/was developed by CCP Shanghai. While I thoroughly enjoyed my beta experience with DUST. It's current state of being leaves MUCH to be desired. After a handful of games in the academy, you're stuffed into public matches for the most part. Either there is no intelligent matchmaking system, or DUST is entirely populated with guys running around in Proto gear stomping the **** out of scrubs.
Eve isn't dying because of DUST. DUST is choking because it was released before it was finished. It's pretty obvious. In the intro video it describes repelling drone incursions and you can't do that at all. There's a laundry list of stuff that is wrong with DUST.
As concerns the iteration and rebalancing of ships in Eve to make them not-shite. CCP is doing a good job of that, for the most part. |
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3131
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 03:54:00 -
[39] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Man, I totally missed this thread, probably because I don't have Large Collidable Objects on my overview. Teach me your ways, Master... |
bloodknight2
Talledega Knights PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
126
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 05:07:00 -
[40] - Quote
I think the real problem is that CCP didn't rebalance the right ship at the right time. They rebalanced T1 frigs to help noobs, but we are still waiting for black ops and marauder fix. Why the **** are they wasting their time on T1 industrials when a lot of T2 hull need love? |
|
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
1469
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 07:01:00 -
[41] - Quote
I wouldn't say that DUST is falling, as what stems from eve-offline is that it has stabilyzed around some 4k/5k PCU and there's a regular influx of newborn characters in the line of 10k/11k per day. Dunno wether those numbers mean success or were the development goal, though.
Durign development, I recall that DUST was meant to have about two years to "hit or miss", and probably this means that we'll see development on it going on at least until 2015.
From my point of view, being one of the few remainign WiSers around, I sure would had prefered to have all those DUST millions thrown into EVE avatar gameplay, but so far can't really blame DUST for the demise of avatars in EVE. CCP's lack of vision and "getting it" are solely to blame for that, and a time will come when lookign back, the failure to implement avatar content will be deemed one of the reasons why EVE died. CCP Unifex: -á"lurking single players (...)-áare the majority of characters on Tranquility"
...And so now we know why CCP hasn't done anything for soloers since Apochrypha. |
Chin MonWang
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 07:38:00 -
[42] - Quote
Setaceous wrote:People find change insulting? Isn't one of the primary tenets of this game Adapt of Die? Personally I love change, it forces people to think in different ways and expand their views both in-game and (indirectly) in RL. I can't stand stagnant conservatives who oppose change simply because it causes them to have to use their brains once in a while.
Strong point! reminds me what made the Star Trek series (and movies) so immense popular for literally hundreds of millions of viewers: "to boldly go where no one has gone before" (thus the fun of never knowing what to EXACTLY expect next...thus changes)
My opinion as a relative new comer: CCP does realy an excellent job!
(Fyg: for many years I did not even know EVE existed??!? It was only much later on (5 months ago to be precise) that I noticed some message in STEAM stating "your friend AXAXAX at present is playing EVE online", so I took a look and it was at that time that I learned of EVE. There must be (and have been) many others just like me not even knowing of this brilliant and unmatched MMO.) |
advii
Kossu and Keppana Inc.
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 10:19:00 -
[43] - Quote
My suspicions were right.
Burn Jita was an inside job. |
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
848
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 10:41:00 -
[44] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote: so what is so bad about the rebalancing? because i am well not a very old player 2,5 years almost but defo not new and i am pretty content with rebalancing so far.
Well - I have characters at 140, 110 and 40 mill SP - can't see a use for the higher 2 because a T1 frig or cruiser performs plainly on par with their T2 counterparts for a fraction of the price, BS outside blobs are downright rubbish and HAC rebalance plans are distilled bukkake. Can't see what I use the old chars for, can't see anything I want to train the new one into.
just a bitter vet, nothing else to see here, move along This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.-á Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless |
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
537
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 11:40:00 -
[45] - Quote
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote: From my point of view, being one of the few remainign WiSers around, I sure would had prefered to have all those DUST millions thrown into EVE avatar gameplay, but so far can't really blame DUST for the demise of avatars in EVE. CCP's lack of vision and "getting it" are solely to blame for that, and a time will come when lookign back, the failure to implement avatar content will be deemed one of the reasons why EVE died.
This, yes.
Incarna fail made evident as CCP was unable (and very few game companies can) to carry on at the same time 3 devlopment lines: EVE, WOD and DUST.
In this scenario I'd liked they decided to refocus all on EVE development. Instead they decided to cancel WOD (I know, is not officially cancelled, but that was in the facts), put EVE in mantainence/life-support only and focus their development strenght on on Dust.
I think they were forced to do it due to some already existing agreement with Sony. It's only my personal idea of course, but I can't think to any other plausible reason to do somenthing that stupid.
In this picture all the years of "ship rebalancing" were functional cause are small cheap changes. Needed and good, but all small stuff they usually do as side changes inside major expansions. Is not like you need a team of scientists working for years to rebalance a T1 cruiser, is not a real spaceship, it's only an UPDATE on a SQL table.
So it's: little, needed changes but useful to sell the idea to the playerbase they were focused on EVE core. While using their subscriptions to pay DUST.
We'll see what will happen when will become evident as Dust is a fail too...
|
Far Hone
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 12:24:00 -
[46] - Quote
Joan Greywind wrote:I don't play dust, so this will about EVE.
It will help if you look at it from a developer's point of view. When they decide to do any sort of change it is based on numbers and stats. It is not (usually at least) based on a whim, personal biases towards ship types, or just f ******* their playerbase. rightly so sometimes you can make wrong assumptions from these numbers and do something wrong.
Now for the examples:
When they nerfed heavy missiles, they didn't just do it because some people felt it was overpowered, but they did it because heavy missiles were by far the top killers of pvp ships. So their heavy usage means they are overpowered and need to be brought in line with other weapon systems. Does that mean that some niche role of heavy missiles got an undeserved nerf? maybe (such as site runners), but overall the change will usually bring more "balance" to the game.
Now to the change of the t1 cruisers and frigates. Now rightly so they got buffed, but still t2 can easily beat t1 any day of the week (assuming similar real life pilot skills). But now instead of t2 trumping t1 in a hilarious way, t1 stands a chance if a certain gang does it right. The change of t1 cruisers and frigates didn't come at a whim, the numbers showed that in any pvp encounter they were horribly under powered. Before the change no serious pilot flew t1 frigates or cruisers because they were simply so weak, and that is (in my humble opinion unbalanced). From personal experience I can tell you now we fly moa's, vexors. In null caracels are finally a real doctrine. It doesn't matter how you feel, what matters is the numbers, and when any kind of ship is being used relatively less than its counterparts, then it is under powered. That is why the zealot didn't changed much and the eagle got a huge buff, people actually use zealots and nobody used eagles. It is all about the usage number and stats.
Don't get me wrong they can still **** it up and over nerf or over buff something, but from the current meta you can see a wider and healthier array of ship usages, which means that the balance was a great success.
Now your argument that higher skill characters should be better at everything (that is what I took from it anyways) is also wrong. EVE developers have always been stressing that if you specialize you will always be able to reach the same effectiveness of a higher skilled player . More skill points will give you more options but will not give you a permanent advantage over newer players, and that is a very good game mechanic (imo).
Some people will always get hurt with any change in the game, but what is most important is the overall health and balance of the game, and the game is definitely healthier and more balanced than a year ago.
THIS marks the beginning of the end of nerf moan posts. |
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
496
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 12:47:00 -
[47] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.
No, that's done because EvE couldn't exist without the usual means to play PvP (cheap methods to fight).
Even years ago folks gravitated to cheap ships as a means for cheap thrills, instead of actually making skills worthwhile (game is too expensive to play unless someone else forks your play time). "In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." ~George Orwell
|
Pytria Le'Danness
Placid Reborn
23
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 12:50:00 -
[48] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.
What can I say... I am amazed by the amount of tinfoil hattery in this one sentence. Grats!
|
Ellendras Silver
No Self Esteem ShAdOw PoLiTiCs
70
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 17:02:00 -
[49] - Quote
IbanezLaney wrote:Setaceous wrote: Except the higher SP characters would be able to load out the T1 frigate better (much better) than a newbie character. Unless those high SP ones are missing basic skills in favour of getting into more advanced ships. I also dislike people that do that, what a huge waste of time.
Once you have Frig 5 - T2 guns, tank and support skills what else is there? So after maybe 10mil sp what advantage is there to the players who invested isk into better ships/fits if T1 ships are now better than faction ships (Frigates are a great example) ? The high sp players don't 'magically' have Frigates trained to 11. gunnery/missle support skills to 5 gunnery spec to 5 drone skills to 5 cybernetics/drug skills and thermodynamics 5 navigation all 5 ewar stuff 5 core fitting 5 all tanking skills elite (shield, armor and hull) rigging skills 5 sensor comp skills 5 so you will be harder to be affected by ewar
that is all good for a lot of SP |
Verunae Caseti
Viziam Amarr Empire
158
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 17:25:00 -
[50] - Quote
Ace Uoweme wrote:No, that's done because EvE couldn't exist without the usual means to play PvP (cheap methods to fight).
Totally. If only they were smart, they would limit the ability to be effective in PvP to the top 1% of the playerbase and leave everyone else as cannon fodder.
I'm sure that would attract new players and result in growth in an MMO after ten years, something that's almost unprecedented in the industry instead of what EVE is experiencing which is a shrinking playerbase due to the ability of new players to compete.
You should absolutely work for CCP and rescue EVE before it's too late.
Wait, except.
Right.
OP, when Ace Uoweme shows up in your thread and starts sharing wisdom you know you've probably wandered off into nonsense-ville at some point. |
|
Large Collidable Object
morons.
2162
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 22:01:00 -
[51] - Quote
Verunae Caseti wrote:Ace Uoweme wrote:No, that's done because EvE couldn't exist without the usual means to play PvP (cheap methods to fight). Totally. If only they were smart, they would limit the ability to be effective in PvP to the top 1% of the playerbase and leave everyone else as cannon fodder. I'm sure that would attract new players and result in growth in an MMO after ten years, something that's almost unprecedented in the industry instead of what EVE is experiencing which is a shrinking playerbase due to the ability of new players to compete.
Which will lash back when those new players find out there' nothing worth to train for left.
Thanks to remaps, it took me a little over a year to train all fitting, capacitor, targetting, subcap-relevant navigation skills, gunnery support skills, all destroyers, BCs and a set of large T2 (LR and SR) guns and a racial BS type to V, along mostly perfect combat drone skills including the use of T2 heavies and T2 sentries on my noob alt.
That's a good change, because it allows noobs to catch up - and some of these noobs wil train into T2 ships after that because they don't know yet they're not worth it (except bombers, interdictors or HICs).
However, it was never bad to be a noob - I keep my characters strictly separated, don't transfer isk between them, no station trades etc... so SP-wise, I know the noob experience pretty well and I never felt useless (sold my first character, so I've been a 'noob' 4 times).
Yeah - i might be a bitter vet, but current iterations shorten the process of becoming one to 1-2 years. You know... morons. |
Chin MonWang
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 00:56:00 -
[52] - Quote
Joan Greywind wrote:I don't play dust, so this will about EVE.
It will help if you look at it from a developer's point of view. When they decide to do any sort of change it is based on numbers and stats. It is not (usually at least) based on a whim, personal biases towards ship types, or just f ******* their playerbase. rightly so sometimes you can make wrong assumptions from these numbers and do something wrong.
Now for the examples:
When they nerfed heavy missiles, they didn't just do it because some people felt it was overpowered, but they did it because heavy missiles were by far the top killers of pvp ships. So their heavy usage means they are overpowered and need to be brought in line with other weapon systems. Does that mean that some niche role of heavy missiles got an undeserved nerf? maybe (such as site runners), but overall the change will usually bring more "balance" to the game.
Now to the change of the t1 cruisers and frigates. Now rightly so they got buffed, but still t2 can easily beat t1 any day of the week (assuming similar real life pilot skills). But now instead of t2 trumping t1 in a hilarious way, t1 stands a chance if a certain gang does it right. The change of t1 cruisers and frigates didn't come at a whim, the numbers showed that in any pvp encounter they were horribly under powered. Before the change no serious pilot flew t1 frigates or cruisers because they were simply so weak, and that is (in my humble opinion unbalanced). From personal experience I can tell you now we fly moa's, vexors. In null caracels are finally a real doctrine. It doesn't matter how you feel, what matters is the numbers, and when any kind of ship is being used relatively less than its counterparts, then it is under powered. That is why the zealot didn't changed much and the eagle got a huge buff, people actually use zealots and nobody used eagles. It is all about the usage number and stats.
Don't get me wrong they can still **** it up and over nerf or over buff something, but from the current meta you can see a wider and healthier array of ship usages, which means that the balance was a great success.
Now your argument that higher skill characters should be better at everything (that is what I took from it anyways) is also wrong. EVE developers have always been stressing that if you specialize you will always be able to reach the same effectiveness of a higher skilled player . More skill points will give you more options but will not give you a permanent advantage over newer players, and that is a very good game mechanic (imo).
Some people will always get hurt with any change in the game, but what is most important is the overall health and balance of the game, and the game is definitely healthier and more balanced than a year ago.
That comment/view is realy worth while reading and of quality contents, so I gave it 'a like' and I quoted it, to let the text appear for a second time, to be read! IMO of interest for all kinds of players, skilled either high, middle or new comers! (...and I myself am a relative new player)
|
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
723
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 01:09:00 -
[53] - Quote
No, but video killed the radio star. This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Erutpar Ambient
Real Nice And Laidback Corporation Black Core Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 04:48:00 -
[54] - Quote
I personally have to agree with the OP.
First of all the "Balance" pass does actually put T1 ships closer to the strength of their T2 counter parts. Maybe 1 on 1 the T2 may still be the better ship, the amount of proficiency increase is minimal at best. Though the line between T1 and T2 frigate may be fairly strong, the line between T1 and T2 HAC cruiser is a lot less distinct. Changing the medium Long-Range weapons is more of a fix for the HACs than the actual HAC rebalance.
That being said, it's true that the amount of SP required to become proficient in the T2 ships (and the core skills too) is more of a liability than it is a benefit. The cost or replacing clones reaches a point where the cost of the ship is negligible. This then de-incentivizes high SP players from ... well ... playing.
Another point was made in this thread. What are the new features we're getting now? Fixing the old stuff. We've gotten Jump effects that you can't turn off, we've gotten bounty system, a new mining system that basically turns mining lasers obsolete. We have the old scanning system with less sites to scan, a churched up site list and preset probe formation. We have the old ore's mineral composition adjusted. The biggest mechanic change that i've seen is the Ice Mining site change, and i have really no idea how big of a change that is oh and the tedious hacking minigame. All of these changes we've gotten work exactly the same as before: jumping jumps you, mining mines, ice mining mines, scanning scans. Really the only thing that has changed are the aesthetics.
And while i do believe in making the old stuff better, i'm starting to get this feeling i had before. A long time ago i was a World of Warcraft player. (yes i know, there goes my credibility) But anyways, long ago in the World of Warcraft, they had these things called "Skill Trees" that allowed you to allocate points into making specific skills and spells stronger. One of the Pro's was that you could build your class into many many different things, however the Con to this is that there were also many skill builds that were not very viable. So Blizzard thought it would be a grand idea to change the skill tree and make it so that you could no longer build a character that didn't work. But no only could you not fail your build, but your build would be the same build as everyone else's and each tree was meant for a specific "Role", IE Fire mage: PVE and Ice mage:pvp
To get an even greater idea of this, it's sort of like the Diablo 2 vs Diablo 3 skill system. Diablo 2 had nearly unlimited unique builds with many "Unique Snowflake" builds that would function greater than anyone would imagine causing people to remake the same class over and over. Unlike Diablo 3 where you can freely change your what 3 skill buffs? as often as you like.
But anyways, the point is this: It really feels like to me that all the "rebalanced" ships are being designed for "SPECIFIC ROLES" and they are losing a lot of their unique but functional builds. We're losing a lot of utility highs. We're getting a lot of Armor and Shield rep bonuses. and for those of you who don't know, if you're using a ship and neglecting a bonus, you're putting yourself at a disadvantage to another ship of the same class that is using all of it's bonuses. So using a Brutix without a rep is an automatic gimp compared to a damage resist bonus. And because of the nature of a Brutix, you have to fight a full rack of blasters, a WMD and a Rep, which means you have to fit more armor modules and less damage to be effective. This means that the effective fitting of a Brutix is extremely narrow. In fact it basically designates you specific builds to use.
And then dust.... Dust has a cycle, it goes something like this. Start account, gain SP, gain ISK, lots of ISK, Collect Proto Gear, Figure out there's nothing to save it for later, stomp pubbies with your proto gear. |
Fairren
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
50
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 05:21:00 -
[55] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Most T2 ships haven't even been touched yet, and even the HAC proposals are only at the 1st pass stage and will be tweaked considerably before it's all done.
Seems a bit early to compare the two. You've gotta get the chicken little posts out there while the time is right. |
Invisusira
The Rising Stars The Initiative.
180
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 06:08:00 -
[56] - Quote
...you tinfoils do understand that Dust has not "taken away" development from EVE, right? It's been created by a different team of people; a team of people who would not be working for CCP if Dust did not exist. Core Skills - train em up train em up! |
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
538
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 08:27:00 -
[57] - Quote
Invisusira wrote:...you tinfoils do understand that Dust has not "taken away" development from EVE, right? It's been created by a different team of people; a team of people who would not be working for CCP if Dust did not exist.
yes, and those people used to work for free. So CCP hadn't to make investments. They are just passionate people devolving their lifes in this great project called "Dust".
I see you're a 2011 character, so you may not see the difference of EVE development standards before Dust and how much they were lowered to the point of packaging mere ordinary patches and "selling" them as full expansions.
|
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
538
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 08:40:00 -
[58] - Quote
Erutpar Ambient wrote: But anyways, the point is this: It really feels like to me that all the "rebalanced" ships are being designed for "SPECIFIC ROLES" and they are losing a lot of their unique but functional builds. We're losing a lot of utility highs.
Yes, I agree, but I think this was officially stated (have to find it in the forum); but yes, their idea is to reduce the margin of freedom for "creative" builds and enforce premade roles/specialization to the ships. This is the idea behind the rebalancing. This has advantage (for them, I personally dislike this):
1. It's more easy and friendly. Players need less experience/skill to fit a ship properly, the main job is already made and the margin left for customization is reduced.
2. Keeping the balance is easier too. Cause you don't have to get crazy evaluating all the potential customization/experiments made by players.
3. Is easier to add new ships for specific roles/subroles, since the range of possible customizations is reduced.
Your comparation with WOW fits.
Also, regarding T2. I think this also was stated, but basically they're removed. At least removed as tidy superior option for PVP.
|
Mors Magne
Terra Incognita Insidious Empire
55
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 09:00:00 -
[59] - Quote
Invisusira wrote:...you tinfoils do understand that Dust has not "taken away" development from EVE, right? It's been created by a different team of people; a team of people who would not be working for CCP if Dust did not exist.
As the previous person above says - you don't know all the facts.
The staff turnover in the Shanghai office where DUST is being developed is extremely high. They only have 70 devs or so - these people on Linkedin change at a rapid rate of knots.
DUST players are very disgruntled on the forums.
I doubt whether DUST has broken even or ever will break even.
Eve is CCP's 'cash cow' and it is financially supporting the development of Eve, DUST, and World of Darkness.
In addition, the European economy is not doing well - any growth at the moment might only be due to printing new money.
In short, it's all pretty grim - CCP have overstretched themselves when they should have only focused on Eve - the closest thing they will ever get to a 'sure win'. |
Josef Djugashvilis
Acme Mining Corporation
1301
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 10:36:00 -
[60] - Quote
I would venture to suggest that the Sean Decker chap was been brought in specifically to deal with DUST and its poor player retention rates etc. This is not a signature. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |