Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
bldyannoyed
Estrale Frontiers Project Wildfire
25
|
Posted - 2012.04.07 22:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
I've been racking my brains trying to work out how CCP are going to carry off this tiericide ship rebalance. They've said they want to balance ships around roles and I think this presents them with an opportunity that goes far beyond simply giving the lower tier ships a few extra slots and buffed stats.
Balancing ships by roles, to me, means a chance to make ships at all sizes capable of doing things their larger cousins aren't. Right now anything you fit a Rupture or a Stabber or a Cyclone for can be done better by a Cane. Ignore the meta game "people are more inclined to engage x,y,or z" and just look at the numbers. More damage, more tank, more utility etc etc.
Roles could eliminate this and here's one way I think it could be done. (DISCLAIMER: I dont even pretend that this idea is necessarily balanced with the numbers im gonna suggest, it's for illustraive purposes only):
Let stake the Minnie cruiser/bc line up. and imagine what it would be like with some tweaks to role. I haven't thought about fitting or slots or ship bonuses, just ROLE.
Stabber: Role- Fast Assault (or skirmish or whatever u wanna call it). Role Bonus :- +25% MWD velocity, +50% Falloff, -75% optimal,- 25% tracking. It's a fast Kiter. It fights in falloff and realistically wouldn't want to use Arty because of the tracking and optimal malus. The tracking penalty also affects its ability to engage at close range.
Rupture: Role- Fire Support. Role bonus:- +100% optimal, -75% falloff. Obvious, long range arty platform, sucky with AC's whose range is all in falloff.
Belicose: Role- EWAR. Role bonus :- -75% EWAR mod cap use, -50% EWAR mod CPU use. Ship bonus +5% TP effect and +20% stasis web range per lvl of cruiser. I included teh ship bonuses in this one to suggest how a T1 cruiser can be useful compared to its T2 counterpart. 20km webs aren't exactly uber but they are USEFUL and make this much maligned cruiser viable in a gang.
Cyclone : Role- Combat. Role Bonus:- +50% effectiveness to shield boosters -50% CPU Requirement of shield boosters. Its a tanky ship designed to be the backbone of a gang. It has no weapon bonuses leaving it able to fit anything it wants albeit at less effect than a ship with weapon role bonuses. However it can still tackle and would have enough damage to be threatening thus making its tank worthwhile. As we all know, tanking on its own is not a role in pvp.
Hurricane: Role - Close Assault. Role Bonus: +50% tracking, +75% AfterBurner Velocity, -50% Optimal, -50% Falloff. It's designed to operate inside web range where its superior AB speed and tracking will give it an edge. Attempting to fit for ranged combat is going to be far less effective.
Like I said at the start, the numbers I've posted are purely to deomnstrate a point and I have no doubt that as they are would do horrible things to a lot of ships, but the numbers are not the point. If you think about what we have there you'll see we have 5 tech 1 combat ships, 3 cruiser and 2 bc's, and critically they ALL do things none of the others can. The BC's, despite having more raw dps and tank DO NOT compete against the Cruisers. The Cane does not out-kite the stabber and out artillery the Rupture and out-EVERYTHING the Cyclone. It fills a unique role in the ship line up, as do all the others.
Also I'd like to point out that I'm aware that limiting ships into roles like this does kinda run contrary to the sandbox idea of ship fitting. Pilots, myself included, like to be able to do different things with one hull, but as we know the upshot of that is the current situation where a number of t1 hull are simply obsolete in comparison to the tier2/3 bc's. Yes they're more xpensive but how often have we heard "Cost is not a balancing factor".
Anyways, feel free to tear the idea aprt, I'm sure CCP already know what they wanna do and I doubt it will be anything like this. |
Zarnak Wulf
CTRL-Q Iron Oxide.
311
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 01:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Soundwave mentioned tech one frigates getting a makeover this summer. I interpret that as the second stage of Inferno. I think that you'll see ships repurposed around the attack or brawler concepts. At most you might get a role bonus. But the beauty of tech one is also diversity so I hope stuff doesn't get pigeon-holed into roles too much. |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
1488
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 06:10:00 -
[3] - Quote
A 50% tracking bonus. No, fiddle with base stats like PG, CPU, Speed, Agility, Sig, etc and fittings to deliver the desired result with very few exceptions.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate BattleStar Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 06:35:00 -
[4] - Quote
Too muchspecialization, you basically criple their perfomance in other areas.
Also your vision of combat cruisers not being BC obsoleted lies solely in kitting. |
Nalha Saldana
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
204
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 07:13:00 -
[5] - Quote
Increasing speed of things is a bad idea that can spin out of control, if it would change at all it would be by way smaller numbers. This is why the MWD sig radius was a really nice way to buff AF. |
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
36
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 13:03:00 -
[6] - Quote
as already stated: narrowing down every ship's role to exactly one situation is not a good idea. especially in pvp, the more versatile (and cheap ;)) ships usually prevail.
edit: also, i STRONGLY disagree with the 'cost is not a balancing factor' idea. as long as insurance does not reimburse 99% of your ship + module cost, players will always try to get the most bang for their buck. so the hulls that more expensive will be neglected in favor of hulls that perform similarly but are cheaper. if by some magic, muninn and cerberus became cheaper than drake and cane, you would suddenly see both on the field. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Wraiths of Abaddon CELESTIAL ORDER RISING PHEONIX
59
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 15:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
"+75% AfterBurner Velocity"
No |
Perihelion Olenard
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 16:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
How long is it going to take to balance ships and give them what they need? Is it not happening at the release of Inferno? The main thing I'm looking forward to is that the higher tech 2 ships don't need the ability to fly the smaller tech 2 ships. I'd also like to see some of the older ships changed to be more useful like the brutix and hyperion. The cyclone and ferox really needs some help, as well, IMO. Oh, I'd also like to see field command ships get a buff. One example of their problem is that the drake does just as well as the nighthawk does just because it has an extra mid, launcher, and rig slot. Yet, the drake costs substantially less and requires substantially less skill training. The nighthawk does get an extra low, but it doesn't really make all that much of a difference. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
61
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 17:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
Going full-on tiericide can't and won't happen as you'd have an insane amount of overlap, removing any and all hope CCP may have to introduce new toys down the road.
Equalizing the tiers somewhat on the other hand leaves room for additional hulls, avoids too much overlap and will allow us to keep noticeable differences in manufacturing/pricing. Adding a slot or two and focusing roles a bit for the lower tiers while making the roles of the high tier ships more diffuse, helps give 'cheaper' hull purpose which is curently absent due to higher tiers having all bases covered + having better stats.
Keep in mind, that the reason for even opening the Can of Tiericide should not be to make all ships 'equal', but to give me/you/us/them a reason to choose something other than "eWar or max tier" all the time regardless of circumstances. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Wraiths of Abaddon CELESTIAL ORDER RISING PHEONIX
59
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 20:38:00 -
[10] - Quote
Perihelion Olenard wrote:
Oh, I'd also like to see field command ships get a buff. One example of their problem is that the drake does just as well as the nighthawk does just because it has an extra mid, launcher, and rig slot. Yet, the drake costs substantially less (especially with insurance) and requires substantially less skill training. The nighthawk does get an extra low, but it doesn't really make all that much of a difference.
Well considering that Field Commands are based on the slot layout (more or less) of the tier 1 BCs it would only make sense that a potential additional slot would carry over to the field commands. As it stands tier 2 bcs have more base hp and 2 more slots than their tier1 little brothers. With the equalizing of tiers this difference in slot numbers will probably be reduced to 1.
You're spot on about the nighthawk comparison except that the drake does not just have +1 mid, it also has +1 rig making it generally superior to the nighthawk outside of kin/therm dmg dealing targets. Overall the progression from Tier 2 BC to Field Command is one of the worst progressions in the entire game and I'd expect some form of buff in the near future.
|
|
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
51
|
Posted - 2012.04.08 21:27:00 -
[11] - Quote
To give a role you dont need to actually give it a new bonus. Rather change slot layouts and spec. T2 should have the specialty role bonuses. Else you're going to have an expensive t1 with better resists and one less rig slot.
Fact is some ship can be taken out of the game...(Frigates 1-2 cruisers from each race) In the long run might be better than spend time grinding nails against chalk boards figuring out how to make them work. After all the game has progressed since it's inception. |
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries Alliance not Found
27
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 13:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
One of the major balancing issues for Matari vessels is that Arties have such huge fitting requirements compared to ACs and if you're to build a ship with Arties in mind it is almost certain that the playerbase will load it with ACs and cram on more tank than you'd expected. Tiericide may present a means by which to deal with that.
The Maelstrom was designed as a long ranged, fleet alpha platform, at the time of release all tier 3s with the exception of the Hyp were slated as such (the Hyp was given a huge capacitor to allow it to plough into enemy lines over significant distances under MWD, allowing it to break up fleets). It was given sufficient PG to fit Arties but before they were even released of TQ most of the successful fits used ACs (Capital Shield Booster fits for example).
Tiericide might well class it as a bombardment ship and would therefore wish to encourage the use of Artillery. Given a role bonus to the fitting of Arties somewhat akin to that on the 'nado but which did not include ACs the fitting stats could be reduced so that current Arti fits are possible but there is little to be gained from fitting ACs except in situational terms (tracking, close range DPS...etc).
This makes balancing a lot easier, although it does so at the expense of some of the weird and wonderful fits we've come to expect. It might remove the surprise from the assumption that an Abbadon was a heavy plate, heavy DPS ship which turns out to be (as in Kil2's video) a Neut/Nos triple rep set-up. I hope it doesn't, I hope that in making the Prophecy viable they leave it with the prospect of being a brick tanked bait ship so that people actually have to ask themselves whether it's possible when they see one... but I find my lack of faith disturbing... |
Darthewok
Perkone Caldari State
48
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 13:42:00 -
[13] - Quote
1. SCHEDULE: According to the Dev at Fanfest, the ship balancing is supposed to take place over 2 years, so it is an iterative piecemeal change over time. Adjust your expectations of the speed the balancing will be rolled out. T1 frigs and cruisers are probably 1st as part of the new user experience.
2. ROLES: There is no reason additional roles cannot or will not be added, so don't think just the current few are the limit of ship types.
3. COST IS NOT A BALANCING FACTOR: I highly support that cost should never be a balancing factor. This is because there are a lot of very rich old players out there who don't even blink at losing billions. The last time cost was used as a balancing factor was the Dramiel and that was such a ridiculously OP joke before its nerf.
4. IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT: The DEV in charge had a list of non-viable, and not-very-viable ships and it is probably these that will be changed, hopefully not the ones that are viable and popular. They better not be fixing the ships that ARE working fine at the moment, or they are creating ever multiplying problems down the road.
my 0.02 ISK CAVEAT RICHARDUS VOLVERE - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0 |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
985
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 13:58:00 -
[14] - Quote
Darthewok wrote:4. IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT: The DEV in charge had a list of non-viable, and not-very-viable ships and it is probably these that will be changed, hopefully not the ones that are viable and popular. They better not be fixing the ships that ARE working fine at the moment, or they are creating ever multiplying problems down the road.
I still don't have any use of my Proteus that I can't do the same with my Loki or my Tengu. If I want to put holes at brawling a pimp shield Brutix does the same.
|
Kattshiro
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
52
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 15:54:00 -
[15] - Quote
A brick with a super long point? Or cloak ganging? |
Katalci
Creative Cookie Procuring Veto Corp
49
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 06:40:00 -
[16] - Quote
bldyannoyed wrote:Rupture: Role- Fire Support. Role bonus:- +100% optimal, -75% falloff. Obvious, long range arty platform, sucky with AC's whose range is all in falloff.
No. Because no. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |