| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Violated
   |
Posted - 2009.06.18 10:42:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: "CCP Diagoras"
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
Hahahahahahahahahahaha..
Hahahah..
Allright, done laughing. Can i suggest Diagoras to read this post on SHC from Pattern, wich still is a draft, but highlights the problems with Minmatar. |
Needa3
Minmatar
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 11:04:00 -
[62]
Quote:
the rise and fall of the Rapier, which lost a lot of popularity after a rebalancing of speed and stasis webifiers
hmmm could it be that having a very good minnie ship getting a nerf, that makes it like uber junk, have something to do with it?
great report CCP
took you six years to question what players have been saying for the same amount of years
Nerf more and you'll get even less versatile fleets
- scorp: worthless
- phoon: worthless
- pest: worthless
- mael: worthless
- raven: worthless
better undo your previous nerfs and bring the game back to what it used to be instead of this uber blobbing noob stuff
|
Dracira Dracc
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 11:37:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Needa3
- raven: worthless
For lvl 4 Mission a CM Raven i not a bad ship, far away from being worthless.
Anyway - that was one of the more interesting blogs for me ;-) |
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 12:34:00 -
[64]
Originally by: CCP Diagoras
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
The hulls are ok. The large projectiles guns aren't. The Typhoon is still useful due to its ability to use torpedoes and drones, but the other hulls are completely left behind due to the abysmal practical damage their guns do. For all purpose they are as good with other guns as with the guns they are bonused for (see this thread for numbers).
And when you are better off flying them with unbonused guns guess what... We are better off using the same guns on hulls that gives them bonus. Make it so that a Tempest and Maelstrom are undoubtedly better with large projectiles than with lasers (or medium projectiles, the Phoon is surprisingly good with medium autocannons), problem fixed. |
Ariane VoxDei
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 12:58:00 -
[65]
Originally by: CCP Fallout
Full of all sorts of graphs and analysis, Diagoras' blog will surely be a hit amongst all of you market geeks.
Graphs yes, analysis where?
Those battleship graphs are nearly useless from a player point of view, we don't have the additional information (numbers) to corelate this into insight.
It's like looking at something a beancounter who's never played the game would make. Numbers/graphs, but largely meaningless, unless you are the "nerf'em if they are high on our graphs" type, which just breeds mediocracy and kills innovation (why strive to be good, if being good gets you nerfed).
What good are relative percentages among tier1, then among tier2, then among tier3? Things aren't that neat or static.
Some are L4 boats, some are (lr)fleet ships, some camp/shortrange ships, some are EHP pigs, some are highly specialized. And this transcends tiers.
Also, you don't just snap your fingers and go from L5 and T2spec in one races battleships to fly another race, as fast as you can buy them on the market. At least regular players don't.
It takes months of SP. Many, if not most, will be inclined to stick to what they have specced, so training plans are not upset.
"uh, there were some torpedo changes in 2007, that might explain the 50% drop in relative market share compared to cruise launchers." Well, DUH, captain obvious.
I mean, really, what did you expect? A 50% jump in popularity?
Hm, possibly, in a wrong and twisted way, it suddenly makes sense that stealth bombers were changed from cruise to torp - after all some people are believers in forcing things on OTHER people to make everything equally used, particularly if they themselves are not effected.
On a techinal note I deplore your choice of graph. It is inherently bad for our purposes, unless(!) the total volume remains constant.
Also even with constant volume it is problematic.
By definition, if one number goes up, the relative share of the others goes down, constant volume or not and vice versa.
This exaggerates changes and also makes it much harder to detect trends properly.
For example some ships may sit at a fairly constant volume, or at a near constant volume of pilots (above x million SP) and still show up as a incline or decline, when you plot that into a % of all ships, due to as little as one ship becoming more or less popular.
Practical example from your blog.
Tier 2 battleships in the 2008 to now period.
The fall alone of the raven, could (I am not say it does) make up for the combined rise of the Apoc and Mega, if you were inclined to limit your search for answers to be something within the Tier 2 graph.
Taking the july2008 to end of graph numbers:
Total raven share drop: roughly 15 points.
Total apoc+mega rise: roughly 15 points.
Tempest virtually unchanged.
Then, what is the analysis?
"Interestingly, the actual number Raven trades through the market has stabilised over the past year, whilst other battleships have continued to grow as expected in terms of numbers traded."
Oops. As expected, the graph "lied", Raven did not fall, the others just rose dramatically. In other words, VOLUME MATTERED.
This is not analysis of the data at hand, this is cheating and including data that is not present.
Analysis would look at the reasons behind the changes, not saying: it dropped because these other numbers rose, because that tells us nothing interesting, it is stating the obvious:
The part that did not change in size now makes up a lesser percentage of the whole because some of the other parts grew in size.
Or to be mean to fat people:
Observation:
The fat people are no longer as far above average weight as they used to be.
And then giving this explanation:
This is because some of the skinnier people put on a lot of weight (making a new, higher, average).
It totally avoids the interesting questions of why the other numbers rose, and why the raven did not scale with population growth.
How much more clear does it need be? The graphs are nearly useless without more data!
Another example.
You make a note of the coldwar drop for Ravens (tier2), but omit the coldwar spike for the dominix (Tier1) and how it kept rising for almost 2 years after that.
Also no explanation for the dramatic recovery of the raven after the coldwar drop.
And wtf, where are Tier 3 ships in all this? They were left competely out. Totally unacceptable in a analysis of battleships to leave those completely out of it.
And then there is the whole issue of market speculation (resale), which effects traded volume. High volume attracts more speculation, which in turn increases volume a bit more, biasing already popular ships.
So.
Why % of tier?
Why leave out a whole tier? That Tier 3 joined later is no excuse.
** Why of traded volume? ** When there are much more "real" volumes, like manufactured / in existance / destroyed.
|
Nullshadow
Minmatar
Aperture Harmonics
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 14:26:00 -
[66]
I suspect that tier 3 BSes and Marauders were left out because they make the racial disparities in the graphs we were shown look minor. Golem vs Vargur, anyone?
CCP should not rely on player consensus as to the problems with Minmatar vessels to make their balancing choice. The devs should take the numerous complaints, run the same numbers the community does to verify that we are not lying (e.g. 37.5%, hello?), and then make their own decision. They did this with the Nagl, and based on the feedback on these forums before and after the changes it was not 100% what the player base wanted, but all told it seems to have proved a widely-accepted solution.
|
Elric Redeye
Ex Coelis
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 15:46:00 -
[67]
There are plenty of well-reasoned threads out there detailing what's wrong from every angle. That is not to say there are easy fixes but how can CCP possibly not know the "consensus" is Minmatar BS are not as good as others for PvE or most forms of PvP?!
I'm one of those noobs who did not know enough when I started Eve and chose Minmatar because the description sounded cool. At the start, the Rifter Frigate is great. I didn't feel picked on at all. But now that I'm flying a Maelstrom (almost all T2 fitted) and know a bit more about the game mechanics, well, I started cross training Caldari. Very sad statement for Minmatar big ships.
Who wants to always play Eve on 'hard mode?'
+1 vote for troll of the year |
Spurty
Caldari
Ore Mongers
BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 16:52:00 -
[68]
I have Amarr BS5 and Minmatar BS 5
Having used both all I can say is:
- Minmatar ships miss waaaaay too much
- Amarr don't miss, waaaay too much fun to get top damage dealer to go back to minnie ships.
When the last of my inventory of minnie ships is exhausted, I'll not fly anymore. Their guns are awful. Not an opinion, a fact based on experience of flying both minnie and amarr ships.
No one likes to miss 100% of the time just because you always have to fight in fall off / hit moving targets.
Doesn't affect anyone but minmatar either (again, purely from experience of flying 'other ships'.
Don't really care if you fix it CCP, just don't nerf all the others!
Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails
hi cat here
i was thinking earlier about corpses...
|
Zupkuck
Jovian Vigilantes
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 17:30:00 -
[69]
Diagoras, are you reading these comments?
|
Pattern Clarc
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 18:19:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Zupkuck
Diagoras, are you reading these comments?
|
|
|
Pattern Clarc
Celtic Anarchy
Force Of Evil
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 18:30:00 -
[71]
Quote:
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
Raw data
Fall off Mechanics - 225
Tempest - 160 (including BS diversity)
Artillery - 155
Minmatar Capital Ships - 114 (including naglfar)
Shield Boost Bonuses - 109
Large Autocannons - 78 (including per tier falloff increase)
Target Painters - 71
Split Hardpoints - 62
Typhoon - 55 (mostly switching armor and shield hp)
Muninn - 42
Interceptor Locking Range - 34 (mostly claw lock range)
Jag/Wolf bonus swap - 30
Projectile Ammo - 26
Mealstrom - 12 (moar speed/agility)
Fleet sniper - 12
ECCM - 9
Cyclone - 9
Minmatar Recons - 9
Vargur - 6
Breacher - 5
Burst - 1 |
Shidhe
Minmatar
The Babylon5 Consortuim
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 18:43:00 -
[72]
All minnie BS are sub-par (not dire, just not so good). The minnie design philosophy just doesn't work so well on big ships.
Phoon - Needs more grid - really! A little more speed would be nice, to give it a real niche - speed should be the phoon's real purpose to fit the minnie philosophy.
Tempest - The main problem here is the artys, not the Tempest itself. The Minmatar need a fleet BS to shoot out with everyone else...
Maelstrom - Not flown this much myself, so I will leave it for others to comment on a role here. |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 21:34:00 -
[73]
Why are Minmatar battleships the least popular?
Let me state the obvious - Large Artillery sucks.
The ammo capacity is way too low.
The damage is sub-par.
The tracking is bad.
The grid requirements are too high for the ships.
|
Trojanman190
Yultani Advanced Research
Dark Orbit Associate's
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 21:50:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Trojanman190 on 18/06/2009 21:55:11
Originally by: Real Poison
"Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread."
ever read the Ships & Modules forum?
Minmatar ships are too versatile, too mediocre, too SP intense.
Amarr ships are better armor tankers.
Amarr ships are better damage dealers.
Gallente ships are better armor tankers.
Caldari ships are better shield tankers.
Caldari ships are better missile boats.
Caldari ships are better EW boats.
Gallente ships are better drone boats.
Split weapon system generally suck (SP-wise, 2 ammo types to carry around is a PITA)
Range and damage potential of large projectiles are generally worse than other weapons.
And iirc the lack of cap need for the guns is already calculated in the lower cap capacity. So no real advantage in using the cap for tanking to make up for it.
TLDR
they can do almost everything, but excel at nothing.
QFT
Edit:
Just adding that I,ve got Minmatar and Amar BS V and t2 large guns for both races. Unless something changes, I don't ever plan on flying a minmatar BS again.
|
Alt Tabbed
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 22:28:00 -
[75]
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
Originally by: Zupkuck
Diagoras, are you reading these comments?
|
Htaer
|
Posted - 2009.06.18 23:21:00 -
[76]
I find our own banter of flaming and trolling each other to be just as bad as diagoras's comment. How about, those of you who enjoy putting people down, try to be productive instead, and suggest something useful to the CCP devs work hard to make the frickin' game better, regardless of your rudeness. The Minmatar ships are lacking in DPS and the large cannons can be ineffective. I suggest the skills required be somewhat close to the other race's BS skill requirements.
Also, feel free to troll me. A noob is a noob, an you have all been there before. 
|
Tildes own
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 02:25:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Alt Tabbed
Originally by: Pattern Clarc
Originally by: Zupkuck
Diagoras, are you reading these comments?
hahahha
Originally by: Queue K'Umber
It is unseemly when a player, regardless of their occupation(in-game), becomes a self-congratulatory poastaholic.
~Join the "C&P" channel ingame~ |
Typhado3
Minmatar
Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium
Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 02:44:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Typhado3 on 19/06/2009 02:44:19
Originally by: The Mittani
there's no consensus on what's wrong with minmatar bs because there are so many things wrong with them
What it said.... |
Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
White Core
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 07:05:00 -
[79]
would be nice if ccp learned from there own grahps..
www.garia.net |
Doctor Mabuse
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 11:20:00 -
[80]
Statistics are like bikinis; what they reveal is interesting, but not as interesting as what they conceal!
 |
|
|
Zupkuck
Jovian Vigilantes
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:34:00 -
[81]
Any day now, Diagoras. We aren't going to forget how gimped Minmatar BSes and Projectiles in general are over the weekend.
|
Kalintos Tyl
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 12:43:00 -
[82]
Quote:
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
maybe missed big sticky like this? http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1051722
60D GTC - shattared link |
dor amwar
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:38:00 -
[83]
Quote:
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
a dev post that needs to be moderated for trolling 
|
D'Artagnan
Bladerunners
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:43:00 -
[84]
"Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread."
You have to be joking!!! I have been playing eve since release. 1 month ago I figured you would never bother fixing Minnie ships so I am now cross training!!
Here is a clue for you:
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1051722
Go read it lots of good ideas to fix Minnie and Projectiles.
|
Zupkuck
Jovian Vigilantes
Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 13:53:00 -
[85]
Originally by: dor amwar
Quote:
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
a dev post that needs to be moderated for trolling
I hope he didn't get canned for that. It was dumb, but still. I really just want a response.
|
Nullshadow
Minmatar
Aperture Harmonics
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 15:17:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Zupkuck
I hope he didn't get canned for that. It was dumb, but still. I really just want a response.
If CCP fires a dev whose purview is market analysis for a confused comment on ship balancing, then I will be truly disappointed in them (rather than my current frustrated affection).
I wonder if the "lack of consensus" comment is less a comment on the community and more represents something internal to CCP. Diagoras may not know much about the ships in terms of mechanics, asked a coworker, and got a muddled response. The comment might have been a quite straightforward suggestion that we should be vocal about it to help inform the internal discussion from someone who just did not know that there already was a huge hairy mess on the forums. I would guess from his minimal linked history that Diagoras' job has nothing to do with keeping up with the forums.
Or, if it is a troll, well... my hat's off, it is pretty epic. |
Nicholai Pestot
Gallente
Scorpanti Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 16:29:00 -
[87]
Quote:
Regarding Minmatar, there doesn't seem to be any real consensus on why their battleships are the least popular. If you have any theories on why this is, feel free to discuss this in the comments thread.
Your kidding right?
As has already been said, read the excellent draft by Pattern here |
5pinDizzy
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 16:30:00 -
[88]
Caldari would be at the bottom of both graphs if you took out the PVE equation.
Scorpion is bottom because while it's ok at what it does there are better alternatives, it's a suicide ship, a ship that needs to get closer to work better, that'll always be primaried that's incredibly slow to escape or go anywhere.
Noone who goes in a scorpion with a fleet expects to come back alive so it'll get shunned for falcons because a lot of people have enough isk to care more about how their kill/death stats look.
Dominix is so popular because it's incredibly cheap and inredibly good at tanking or incredibly good at dps, easily getting 1000 and really good at RR, meaning it's also going to spike again as everyone wants them in their RR gangs for Wspace and you can just about see that taking effect at the end of the graph.
The fact that the Hyperion being arguably the worst Tier 3 ship will also contribute to the racial preference of the Dominix. |
Mutnin
Mutineers
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 16:46:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Kane Plekkel
Nobody likes Minmatar battleships BECAUSE OF FALCON 
tbh, I dunno. I've always preferred projectiles to hybrids, and armor tanking > shield tanking...perhaps its the bits of scrap they leave behind in salvage?
Projectiles are great on the smaller ships but the BS's just have problems.
I'm not a fan of nerfing or buffing ships just because of forum whines..But these market stats alone should show CCP that Minmatar BS's need some love. I personally wouldn't do a boost to projectiles but to the specific ships.
I'd imagine the Caldari ships are only so popular because of all the mission runners. I don't see them in PVP often.
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2009.06.19 18:34:00 -
[90]
A large projectile buff would be great, other people have suggested lots of good ideas on this.
BS wise I'd like to see some extra grid on the pest, another couple of turret and launcher slots on the phoon (so people can choose weapon system), a bit more cap regen on the strom (to better use the active tank bonus) as well as swap the rof bonus for damage bonus (more alpha please).
Buff matari BS (and maybe the scorp), don't be lazy and just nerf the others |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |