Historical Research Advocate
State War Academy
Caldari State
8
   |
Posted - 2012.09.06 18:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.
if you're looking for the best way to kick the most players in the nuts at one time, this would be it. Fair warning: people who get kicked in the nuts usually fight back. Expect untold levels of drama. |
Historical Research Advocate
State War Academy
Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2012.09.07 18:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Also, we are aware of the number of used tech3 ships in general, and how far the repercussions could go for tweaking them. We know this would be a hot discussion from our playerbase as nobody wants to see their assets changed. That is normal human reaction. We can guarantee you that no matter what happens here, we will definitely do our very best to be as diplomatic, open minded and communicative as we have been in the past to ensure we hear all ends of the arguments and annoy the less amount of people.
However, we are not here to win a popularity contest, we, as ship balancing designers are here to make sure the state of the game is healthy in the long run, and if we have to be universally hated for doing what's needed for EVE Online to last 10 more years in the long run, so be it.
I'm not thinking of the next 10 years, I'm thinking of the last 4. The 4 in which I made long term decisions with results that wouldn't be seen for as long as a year or two. EVE has always stressed the importance of long term planning. When you guys say stuff like this, you're putting everyone who has been or will be making decisions about T3 training, acquisition, building, selling, etc into a very bad spot. You're making our old decisions, the ones whose repercussions we're still working through because thats how you designed the game, into potentially irrelevant or stupid choices. You're making decisions on future actions difficult as well, because no one knows how this will turn out. The issue here isn't so much the T3 itself. I'd care a whole lot less about redesigns if they didn't mean that 14 months of training was wasted or that the last 12 months I spent building up a production unit inside a WH was wasted because the produced ship's value drops.
You may not be here to win a popularity contest, but your company is. In fact, that's its purpose-- designing popular games that people want to play. Designing games that keep changing their fundamental elements and rendering old decisions irrelevant but requiring that decisions be made years in advance does not make your game popular, it makes it tedious and frustrating. There is a reason EVE has so many bittervets--you keep kicking us in the nuts.
postscript: Every CCP employee who communicates with the public should be sent to a Communications 101 class. Saying things like "we're not here to win a popularity contest" and "if we have to be universally hated... so be it" is provocative and puts the reader/listener into an adverserial mindset. Half of the crap CCP mods have to deal with from the playerbase is a direct result of poor communication by CCP employees. |