Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
|
CCP Nozh
C C P
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 19:55:00 -
[151]
Where do tech 3 ships fit in? I think I have to answer this in more detail and explain our current limitations and goals. As you know we're limited to three subsystems in the March 10th release. The fourth subsystem will then follow very shortly. With the first 3 subsystems we're trying to create useful baseline setups options, which don't stray far off the racial flavor that currently exists in EVE. Strategic Cruisers are not meant to take over roles. They're not supposed to be better than their Recon counterparts. They're not supposed to be better than their HAC counterparts. They're not supposed to be better than their commandship counterparts. They are meant to fulfill multiple roles. They are focused on heat, which means they are meant to fulfill those roles properly for a (not so) limited time. Selecting which bonuses belonged in the first iteration was not an easy task. We had different racial sensor strengths in the first release, it got cut. With three subsystems, we knew one would have a racial EW bonus, we just couldn't justify it. Once we've got a solid baseline, we can start thinking about the fourth variation (which I believe will enter the game before Tech 3 ships become a common commodity). We've got plenty of ideas (too many) concerning the roles for the upcoming subsystems, but I'll leave that discussion for a later thread. The assembly of the ships has become a great annoyance to me. Even though having proper descriptions with correct bonuses in-game will make things much easier; I still think the usability is a bit off-putting. Hopefully in the future we can combine the assembly window somehow with the fitting screen and add information about bonuses so you can see the bonuses and slot layout as you go. While IÆm at it I might add something about the prices of Strategic Cruisers. The goal has always been to have them considerably cheap, around the price of tech 2 cruisers. The subsystem cost will be about 1/8th of the hull itself, we want people to own multiple subsystems to mix and match as they see fit. If the price gets out of hand (we canÆt even predict it accurately ourselves) weÆll do something about it. What weÆre looking for from you guys is inconsistencies in attributes and bonuses. Tell us why the attributes donÆt make sense with the bonuses and what we can do to improve them.
PS. I'm falling in love with Proteus 13131 (fitting screen top to bottom).
PPS. I'm at home now without access to a Singularity client, but I'll be in tomorrow and will hopefully be able to give you some numbers.
Nozh Game Designer CCP Games |
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 20:02:00 -
[152]
Fair enough. Hopefully tomorrow's build will give us a workable state to test from.
By the way, this reminded me of something:
Originally by: CCP Nozh PS. I'm falling in love with Proteus 13131 (fitting screen top to bottom).
Could you poke the UI guise to make the order of subsystems in the fitting screen and ship info modules tab agree?
It confusing enough as it is. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Zaiyo Modi
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 20:10:00 -
[153]
Edited by: Zaiyo Modi on 27/02/2009 20:11:07
Please change the design on the t3 "dust buster" cruiser :| http://www.massively.com/photos/one-shots/1391135/full/
Covering up the hole for the handgrip will do nicely.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:07:00 -
[154]
one simple question.
if they won't be better than tech 2 (even when over heating) then why skill point loss?
I thought that was added risk for reward... can you explain your design goals with this? so far you've said nothing about how this fits in.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:24:00 -
[155]
Originally by: MotherMoon one simple question.
if they won't be better than tech 2 (even when over heating) then why skill point loss?
I thought that was added risk for reward... can you explain your design goals with this? so far you've said nothing about how this fits in.
Since this doesn't seem to ever stop coming up, I thought I'd point out something.
SP loss, both real and theoretical (future based) currently exists in Eve.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
SirFett
Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:26:00 -
[156]
Originally by: CCP Nozh Where do tech 3 ships fit in? I think I have to answer this in more detail and explain our current limitations and goals. Stuff...
i did write some long blabla but it boils down to Balancing is extremly hard and also relys on balancing wormholes If they are average in performance and just barely on par with existing ships if you design them to be something( and a notch better if you overheat) they wont be of much interest most of the time making the whole wormhole thing a bit meh aswell
Also just bringing out 3 subsystems and the promise of "more to comeÖ " reeks awefuly like Black ops coming prenerfed with the promise of improvement .... still waiting on that
All in all T3 ships make me go "meh" and shrug ... not suprising thou
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:42:00 -
[157]
Edited by: MotherMoon on 27/02/2009 21:42:30
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
Originally by: MotherMoon one simple question.
if they won't be better than tech 2 (even when over heating) then why skill point loss?
I thought that was added risk for reward... can you explain your design goals with this? so far you've said nothing about how this fits in.
Since this doesn't seem to ever stop coming up, I thought I'd point out something.
SP loss, both real and theoretical (future based) currently exists in Eve.
yes, yes it does, good job pointing out eve has skill loss.
now like I was saying, what is the design goal to have skill loss on ship loss? This seems to me like you want to make the ships more valuable, as NO SHIPS IN EVE give you skill loss other than pods. Why this personal connection?
This isn't a whine, it's just you have not linked the ships role with this new mechanic.
I wouldn't honestly like to know what warrants it, or what you get in return for it. Please, tell me why Me and my ship are so close... IS this an unfinished feature? Some sort of... tech 3 ships will get bonuses from your attributes thing?
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:47:00 -
[158]
Originally by: MotherMoon yes, yes it does, good job pointing out eve has skill loss.
now like I was saying, what is the design goal to have skill loss on ship loss? This seems to me like you want to make the ships more valuable, as NO SHIPS IN EVE give you skill loss other than pods. Why this personal connection?
This isn't a whine, it's just you have not linked the ships role with this new mechanic.
I wouldn't honestly like to know what warrants it, or what you get in return for it. Please, tell me why Me and my ship are so close... IS this an unfinished feature? Some sort of... tech 3 ships will get bonuses from your attributes thing?
And I'm pointing out why is this skill loss so much different than other skill loss?
And I do believe, like most other things, they get bonuses based on level.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Finnroth
Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:57:00 -
[159]
Originally by: An Anarchyyt And I'm pointing out why is this skill loss so much different than other skill loss?
And I do believe, like most other things, they get bonuses based on level.
How often do you lose your pod, and how often your ship? If you don't get into a bubbled engagement there's more or less a certainty to safe your pod from harm. This is a constant, and a basic of the risks within EVE.
Now lets see, you lose SP when loosing the ship - this happens pretty much very often within an engagement, especially if you consider the habit and personalty of most EVE players. They will target T3 just because it hurts more than losing "just" your standard T2 ship. This means, there's more at stake, the loss is higher, the risks far greater (or more or less a certainty, if you get into a T3 vessel, better be prepared to lose some of your SP). That which is missing is more gain out of the ships to compensate for the higher risk of loss.
|
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 21:59:00 -
[160]
Originally by: Finnroth
Originally by: An Anarchyyt And I'm pointing out why is this skill loss so much different than other skill loss?
And I do believe, like most other things, they get bonuses based on level.
How often do you lose your pod, and how often your ship? If you don't get into a bubbled engagement there's more or less a certainty to safe your pod from harm. This is a constant, and a basic of the risks within EVE.
Now lets see, you lose SP when loosing the ship - this happens pretty much very often within an engagement, especially if you consider the habit and personalty of most EVE players. They will target T3 just because it hurts more than losing "just" your standard T2 ship. This means, there's more at stake, the loss is higher, the risks far greater (or more or less a certainty, if you get into a T3 vessel, better be prepared to lose some of your SP). That which is missing is more gain out of the ships to compensate for the higher risk of loss.
When I get blown up, 80% of the time I get podded. But, I suppose that doesn't apply if you're an empire pubbie, because that is usually due to bubbles like you said.
However, I don't lose my ships very often.
But, I don't consider, at most, one day of skill training, a bit deal.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
|
Finnroth
Caldari The Guardian Agency Guardian Federation
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:05:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Finnroth on 27/02/2009 22:06:46 ...
Look up your System map to see where i am located, shouldn't give you too much trouble.
Anyways, in fleet ops: you mostly lose your ship and the pod depending on where your ops was located (i would say 50/50 to lose both after a defeat depending on how deep in enemy territory. My personal quota is a little better, but i often got lucky)
Your standard 20/30/40 vs something engagement: Without bubbles you won't lose your pod. Period. This applys also to most forms of smaller gang warfare.
Also, and this is probably a little more important: If one is not stupid enough to forget backing up the clone, one won't lose any SP at all. It's a calculated risk that is mostly ISK, not SP.
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:13:00 -
[162]
Edited by: keepiru on 27/02/2009 22:14:32
Originally by: An Anarchyyt hogwash
SP loss in current EVE is almost entirely theoretical, given that it only happens if you're a complete muppet and forget to update your clone.
In effect, SP loss from podding exists - and I'm quoting here - purely to enforce the isk loss.
This is entirely separate from the statistical assurance of SP loss from STRACs, which, whatever the amount, makes their cost completely incommensurate to their performance. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:23:00 -
[163]
Edited by: MotherMoon on 27/02/2009 22:25:06
Originally by: An Anarchyyt
And I'm pointing out why is this skill loss so much different than other skill loss?
And I do believe, like most other things, they get bonuses based on level.
because I can die 1000 times in my faction fitted CNR, or a rifter and never lose skill points out of skills that only pertains to that one single ship?
also I agree it's not a big deal.
I'm asking WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY
I'm not whining, honest to god. And by your own arguement, eve allready has sp loss, so why would they change the way it works for one ship if it allready happens?
if you die in your tech 3 ships and THEN get podded.
no sp loss isn't a big deal, but there must be a reason for it. what is the reason. I want know what design it fullfills, what part in balancing they believed it would play.
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:31:00 -
[164]
Originally by: MotherMoon
I'm asking WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY
So that T3 wont become Mainstream such as T2 and the like.
Originally by: CCP Nozh prices of Strategic Cruisers. The goal has always been to have them consi |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:38:00 -
[165]
Originally by: Karrade Krise
Originally by: MotherMoon
I'm asking WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY
So that T3 wont become Mainstream such as T2 and the like.
I don't believe you, I believe some dev somewhere had a reason for it.
and maybe that idea tied into something new like being able to change the paint, or attributes boosting each section of the ship.
I don't see the rp reason for "pod pilot and ship connection so tight it's the whole ship is a pod"
I mean that's an awesome idea, some on, our bonuses for the ship parts should muliple by .1 of our attributes.
so if it's below 10, you lose stats, if it's above 10 you gain stats on that piece. all included cha should be used. it fits, 5 and 5.
|
Sarin Adler
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:40:00 -
[166]
Edited by: Sarin Adler on 27/02/2009 22:44:03 If you eject you don't lose SP, I'm doing it all the time. You won't have time against a blob though (more with lag), but these ships are not to be used in blob warfare.
edit: Nozh have you considered inreasing the overheating bonus? if your intention is to have these ships 'shine' when overheated they need a stronger bonus on that considering the time span of the average encounter when talking about small gang warfare (which is what the ships will be used more for probably).
Consider icnreasing it from 5% to 7.5% or even 10%.
|
Karrade Krise
Galatic P0RN Starz
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 22:43:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Sarin Adler If you eject you don't lose SP, I'm doing it all the time. You won't have time against a blob though (more with lag), but these ships are not to be used in blob warfare.
I think a small side effect could possibly be bringing a little bit of life back into solo pvp...Especially if we get that subsystem with the Cloak Velocity Bonus and targeting delay bonus.
Originally by: CCP Nozh prices T3. goal around the price of tech 2 cruisers
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 23:09:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Sarin Adler Edited by: Sarin Adler on 27/02/2009 22:44:03 If you eject you don't lose SP, I'm doing it all the time. You won't have time against a blob though (more with lag), but these ships are not to be used in blob warfare.
...
let me reword...
hey noah, in this painting, why did you use blue?
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.27 23:39:00 -
[169]
If it doesn't become mainstream the whole expansion will tank, because the almost totality of its content is depending on sufficient demand for T3 ... ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
IceAero
Amarr Shadow Company
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 00:14:00 -
[170]
Originally by: keepiru If it doesn't become mainstream the whole expansion will tank, because the almost totality of its content is depending on sufficient demand for T3 ...
Blah, that's the whole problem with these stupid T3 ships...
They've already said they won't out perform HACs, but without huge demand for them wspace is going not get the attention it deserves.
|
|
keepiru
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 00:52:00 -
[171]
Edited by: keepiru on 28/02/2009 00:53:40 The power level is not a problem in of itself.
Even with the initial roles restricted to HAC/Recon hybrids due to time constraints, they will get used, provided the price:performance ratio hits a sweet spot.
The problem is that losing a day's training (or thereabouts, assuming subsystem skills @ IV) every time you pop is an extremely high additional cost for something at that level of power.
This would be relatively easy to adjust if the SP loss was more granular than a simple "-1 LEVEL".
It would be ideal to have it changed to something more adjustable. Say a % of the SP in the subsystem skill (scales with level trained) or a % of the skill's SP (does not scale), but with just 10 days to go, and (I assume) with the expansion in feature freeze, its unlikely to happen.
I'm also not convinced that penalizing people who train the skill at higher levels more than people who leave it lower is a good idea, with things in the current state its unlikely that subsystem skills will be trained to V, ever, at least once the pilot feels the sting of losing a few of these. They're simply not worth losing 4-5 days of training over.
edit: essentially, the whole T3 Cruiser thing is looking more and more like a trainwreck. ... and I really think they should boost T2 plate HP.
|
Jack Jombardo
Amarr Alternative Realities
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 01:30:00 -
[172]
Originally by: MotherMoon
because I can die 1000 times in my faction fitted CNR, or a rifter and never lose skill points out of skills that only pertains to that one single ship? .... I'm asking WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY
You got the problem allready. Buy GTC for real money, sell ingame for ISK, suizid gang without thinking about how to refinanz your ship.
You know this?: "EvE is all about risk vis reward!!" <- hear this all the time from wannabe PvP/Pirtas
Tell me where the "risk" is when suizid in a T1 ship? NOWHERE as you have 130% insurence! There is a bit of "risk" with T2 but who cares if you simplay can sell another GTC?
Now T3 provides a real "risk" for all you hauler-gangers or hot-drobbers ! Failed to gang? Failed to Hotdrob? take the RISK of losing SP! Next time you'll try it you might first think about YOUR "risk".
Originally by: Vaal Erit Spread your arms out and go "Brrrrrrrrrr" and then "fwap fwap fwap fwap fwap fwap" Then takeoff!
|
Farrellus Cameron
Sturmgrenadier Inc Skunk-Works
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 02:54:00 -
[173]
The only difference amongst the propulsion subsystems is speed and there's no reason to not just pick the fastest one since there is another stat that is effected. Why would anyone pick the slower version when there's no penalty for picking the fastest version? ----------------------------------------------------
|
Mercostol
Gallente Black Nova Corp
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 02:55:00 -
[174]
is it just me or do all possible caldari configurations suffer from lack of cpu? i tryed making a missile boat with 7 launchers and best cpu electronic subsystem. after fitting 7 launchers+3 bcu, i had just enought cpu for 2 hardners and 1 medium shield booster leaving 2 meds empty.
|
Caesar DeSahar
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 03:33:00 -
[175]
personally I think they made this mechanic to encourage piracy a little bit more as pirates will be able to force someone to either eject and lose ship, or lose both ship and skill, but I think CCP didn't forsee one major indirect result:
this mechanic will further discourage people from engaging in pvp, at the moment no one fights unless he's very certain he will win, how many times did a gate end up with 2 20-30 man gangs on both sides but neither dares to jump because they're afraid to lose their advantage and ships? how often do people see an extra neut in local and don't dock up or hide in posses?
I think eve needs to make pvp less risky or less costy to encourage more people to fight instead of hide, and this mechanic will make T3 pilots constantly paranoied and think a new number of thousand times before an engagment instead of the current number of 100 times.
also 0.0 will be a disaster for anyone who flies T3, it's a well known fact that if you fly a ship, there is a high probability you'll lose it, and the next one and the next one, this mechanic will end up with people wasting days and weeks on retraining the same old skills which they could train for something useful and advance in the foodchain.
I am a pvper at heart and the only reason I play eve is pvp, and I find it very difficult to engage in fair fights especially 1v1 because most people are afraid to lose of isk and assets.
|
Caesar DeSahar
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 03:36:00 -
[176]
Edited by: Caesar DeSahar on 28/02/2009 03:36:02
|
Camdim
Caldari The first genesis INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 03:44:00 -
[177]
First point. Every ship should have a default bandwidth for drones of 25mb so they can field 5 small drones if they have space ( which most do.) It can be on the chassis and then you can add extra with the subsystems. Seems kind of silly to have drone space but no bandwidth to operate any.
I would also suggest that while you have the designs in front of you that you remove turrents and lauchers and call them hard points and allow for turrents or lauchers depending on the ship. This was mentioned some time ago as a possible way to fix some imbalances in some existing ship designs. This would be a good time to get it put in the game. For where this was refered to check the long thread of answered questions awhile ago in the general disscussion forum.
I would also suggest that you go through every possible combination of subsystems to make sure you have a usable and desirable ship setup afterward. I have found more then a few that made me scratch my head and go huh?
Skill loss I see this as a way to keep newer players down and give older players an edge. Which is why I want it gone. A newer player has tons of skills they still need to train but can still get into a tech 3 ship but staying in one will be a nightmare for them. They will have to put important skills they don't yet have on hold to recupe lost skill points in the subsystems. Also the skill loss just seems silly overall as it is not in anyway fitting with the current game. Unless some reason can be given of why this is a good idea I say get rid of it place the subsystems skills as a 3-5 level skill and call it a day.
Also as to the subsystems and fitting them to ships I would treat them as rigs for the purposes of getting them on ships. This would give you a default chassis that you could fly ( you shouldn't of course but you could). Then add the sub systems on like rigs/modules. This would help both now and in the future as new modules come out.
|
Breed Love
FinFleet KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 04:38:00 -
[178]
Edited by: Breed Love on 28/02/2009 04:38:51
Originally by: Camdim remove turrents and lauchers
I support this statement, I'm all for removing turrents and lauchers from ships, they suck! No other ship in eve has them, so why should t3? -----
Originally by: Zhulik I thought Premium graphics were supposed to fix that bug where people were trying to salvage Minmatar ships.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 05:12:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Jack Jombardo Edited by: Jack Jombardo on 28/02/2009 01:39:48 Edited by: Jack Jombardo on 28/02/2009 01:38:17
Originally by: MotherMoon
because I can die 1000 times in my faction fitted CNR, or a rifter and never lose skill points out of skills that only pertains to that one single ship? .... I'm asking WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY
You got the problem allready. Buy GTC for real money, sell ingame for ISK, suizid gang without thinking about how to refinanz your ship.
You know this?: "EvE is all about risk vis reward!!" <- hear this all the time from wannabe PvP/Pirtas
Tell me where the "risk" is when suizid in a T1 ship? NOWHERE as you have 130% insurence! There is a bit of "risk" with T2 but who cares if you simplay can sell another GTC?
Now T3 provides a real "risk" for all you hauler-gangers or hot-drobbers ! Failed to gang? Failed to Hotdrob? take the RISK of losing SP! Next time you'll try it you might first think about YOUR "risk".
so the design choice was... for the lulz?
your saying in your opinion they went with skill lost as a flavor thing, and never took it into consideration as far as the ship abilities.
I still don't get it, why introduce something that isn't related to the design at all? my point is, subsystems and skill loss. why.
I mean I think skill loss is a good idea. let me repeat that because I keep getting these stupid replies. I THINK SKILL LOST ON DEATH OF TECH 3 SHIPS IS A GOOD IDEA.
I jsut want to know why they chose that color paint over another.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.02.28 05:15:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Farrellus Cameron The only difference amongst the propulsion subsystems is speed and there's no reason to not just pick the fastest one since there is another stat that is effected. Why would anyone pick the slower version when there's no penalty for picking the fastest version?
sith system one you have a higher base speed, (say 100m/s) and with an afterburn you get a bonus to... 200m/s
with the 3rd subsystem.. you get... base speed 90m/s, and with a bonused afterburner you get 180+45. 225m/s but slower MWD speed.
with the 2nd subsystem you get 90m/s, but because of your agility bonus you can move after while orbiting than using the other two systems.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 .. 14 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |