Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Drew Solaert
Wildcard Inc.
214
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 08:07:00 -
[61] - Quote
I for one love the ship balancing
Not only is it adding more options, it opens up the meta again and has got people thinking about fleet comp again. Take the new logistics frigates they are going to make frig roams deadly, and allow a far wider range of engagements than previously possible.
The new disruption cruisers, while I'm still not sold on the 2x attacky ones (Arbi and Belli) and 2x full ewar ones (Celes and BB) I think they'll add some interesting dynamics and will add more value to a newer member. (And as for the Belli, step over Caracal, there is a new frigate bane out there)
And as for the current and suggested frigs that have be rebalanced, well just damn. They are all kinds of fun, and finding and plotting new fits for them has been just as fun.
I lied :o
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
698
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 08:10:00 -
[62] - Quote
Ah, the old "nothing will ever be perfect, so why even try" argument.
So amusing. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1196
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 08:23:00 -
[63] - Quote
Candidate for worst OP in GD September 2012
Before tiericide: tons of crappy ships After tiericide: tons of awesome ships that will bring a massive amount of FRESH into New Eden.
This means pure win to everybody, except maybe you. This is not just creating new FOTMs (which will evolve even without continuous balancing work btw), but a revolution in fleet comps.
I for one welcome our wonderful new T1 ships, and frankly haven't been this excited about any expansion before.
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
Gillia Winddancer
Shiny Noble Crown Services
75
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 08:47:00 -
[64] - Quote
OP is maybe just mad that he lost his old mining frigate.
Seriously though, a game like this evolves and it cannot evolve if everything remains static.
|
Josef Djugashvilis
The Scope Gallente Federation
574
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 08:58:00 -
[65] - Quote
Roime wrote:Candidate for worst OP in GD September 2012
Before tiericide: tons of crappy ships After tiericide: tons of awesome ships that will bring a massive amount of FRESH into New Eden.
This means pure win to everybody, except maybe you. This is not just creating new FOTMs (which will evolve even without continuous balancing work btw), but a revolution in fleet comps.
I for one welcome our wonderful new T1 ships, and frankly haven't been this excited about any expansion before.
This would only hold to be true if james 315 pages of tosh, does not post about his weird thing with miners again. You want fries with that? |
Alayna Le'line
21
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 09:33:00 -
[66] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Ah, the old "nothing will ever be perfect, so why even try" argument.
So amusing.
Homer said it best
"It's ok, kids, you tried your best and you failed. The lesson is: never try." --Homer J. Simpson
|
Doddy
Excidium. Executive Outcomes
165
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 10:11:00 -
[67] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Doddy wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Lol. Why not? Are you afraid of the training wheels being taken off and you being responsible for how your ship actually functions? Yep, because without balancing and new ships everyone would have been flying stabbabonds for the last 7 years. Except they wouldn't cos no one would play that broken crap and the game would have died in 2006 or something. in any case your premise is entirely flawed, all ships in eve have been designed with a role always. If you had actually read the ship descriptions you would know that. All that ccp is doing with this rebalancing is refining them. Post balancing people will be just as likely to use fits outwith the role as they are now, the difference will be that some hulls will not be automatically worse to use regardless because they are a lower tier. Balancing the ships while removing tiers will actually make it far more likely players will try new fits and new ways of flying a ship. And the "against the sandbox" stuff is crap as well. Eve is a sandbox, ccp provides us with the sand and the walls. If they change the amount of sand or the height of the walls its still a sandbox. CCP is not giving you the sand and the walls, ccp is placing you on rails and telling you what to do. The mining barge changes are the most recent egregious example of this. Hulk is for null, retervier is for afk mining, skiff is for tank, this one is for yield, that one is for safety... .
Except you are wrong, there are people using procurers for afk mining, hulks for hi sec, retreivers for ops and so on. And to be frank it was worse before the balancing when it was even more "on rails" - skiif is for mercoxit, makinaw is for ice, hulk is for ore. That was far more restricted than it is now.
|
Lord Zim
1495
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 10:20:00 -
[68] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Lol. Why not? Are you afraid of the training wheels being taken off npc corp Not emptyquoting. |
Acac Sunflyier
Burning Star L.L.C.
202
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 12:42:00 -
[69] - Quote
I think ccp is just trying to get the broken ships not be broken. Like when was the last time you saw an Exequrer used in pvp? Or anything for that matter other than a newbie's first cruiser? There just isn't anything intresting on the front page of the GD anymore. Yawn! |
Skogen Gump
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
115
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 12:44:00 -
[70] - Quote
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode wrote:[quote=Aiwha]
You forgot Invasion Iteron.
That just sounds rude :D
|
|
Jack Tronic
borkedLabs
61
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 12:45:00 -
[71] - Quote
If CCP didn't balance the game, everyone would be flying minmatar still. |
Maeltstome
Caldari Deep Space Ventures Intrepid Crossing
73
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 13:34:00 -
[72] - Quote
Ensign X wrote:Quoting this reply as it has as much logic and intelligence as the original post.
QFT |
Cearain
Imperial Outlaws
612
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 13:54:00 -
[73] - Quote
Gillia Winddancer wrote:OP is maybe just mad that he lost his old mining frigate.
Seriously though, a game like this evolves and it cannot evolve if everything remains static.
Its supposed evolve due to player action not because the devs keep changing the rules.
I am happy for some occassional changes. Sure it can add variety to the game.
It is starting to get a bit ridiculous how often they are changing the rules. It used to be that experience piloting counted for something. You learn what ships can and can't do well from months and years of flying with and against them. Now with new game changing modules and ship changes coming out every 2 weeks that is no longer the case.
Might as well learn to play an entirely new game.
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Vertisce Soritenshi
Tactical Vendor of Services and Goods Partners of Industrial Service and Salvage
1734
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 13:57:00 -
[74] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:The mark of a theme park mmo is the constant rebalancing efforts engaged in by their developers I stopped reading right there because you clearly have no clue what you are talking about whatsoever.
Have a nice day. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! |
Denidil
Evocations of Shadow Eternal Evocations
514
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 14:08:00 -
[75] - Quote
Dear OP
Contract me all your stuff then biomass yourself Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design. |
Morgan North
The Wild Bunch Electus Matari
84
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 14:14:00 -
[76] - Quote
I'm up for rebalancing, even if it brings new FOTM. In a certain way this is what keeps the eve universe alive. Thre's always that ship that's marginnally better than the rest of its class, and a group of players that go out of their (read, th usual) way to bring these down. This rebalancing will change and shift the power base, and it'll take a while, probably around a year or so, for player tofully optimize builds and experiment to their hearts content. Afterall, this rebalance has left the players for a few years of playing well and good, eve with obvious unbalanced hulls.
I'm up for a new rebalancing, even if its just to make every player existing today to alter their perspective on this or that hull, without turning anything into a solo pwnmobile.
So, its neither a waste of time (as it promotes a fluid experience that players need to re-learn at the cost of ship losses), nr pointless (Else some of the ships will steadilly raise in price due to deman and in the long run, everythign else will jsut simply be stopped being built).
If anything, some of the offensive system my also be tweaked, further altering the way things work nowadays.
Interesting times! |
Ezra Tair
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
97
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 17:01:00 -
[77] - Quote
I always wanted to make a game like ever were players could design their own ships for use, and pay *something* for a design to be submitted, reviewed and created in game by the devs, and released as a low run BPC.
So that the entire game would be populated by unique ships (or mostly unique at lest), and a meta-game of ship design between players would develop enriching the sandbox.
Eve has this now to an extent (drakes vs HACs vs hellcats) but it would be cool if it was more ingrained into the core aspcets of a game.
|
Riedle
Paradox Collective Choke Point
169
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 17:08:00 -
[78] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:The mark of a theme park mmo is the constant rebalancing efforts engaged in by their developers to achieve the mythical land of perfect balance between their various characters. These efforts, however, never work and always lead to the rise of a new flavor of the month which in turn leads to new rounds of whining on the forums by the fans of the various classes of characters and ultimately new rounds of balancing by the developers. Hence, an endless cycle of nerfing and buffing is engaged in that usually leaves more people dissatisfied then happy.
Eve as a sandbox type game should be immune from this sort of nerf/buff cycle, and yet the dev's have jumped into a full scale round of re-balancing. This re-balancing is fundamentally anti-sandbox. CCP is going so far as to actually tell us which hulls are for tank, which dps, which hulls are for null (eg the hulk), which are for afk mining (eg reteriver), etc. . . Ultimately, none of this balancing will work as all it will do is create new flavors of the month, which will, in turn, force new rounds of nerfs/buffs.
Meh, their should be efforts to balance the ways people optimize their ships/fleets/doctrines.
A Nano, passive shield fleet should, in some circumstances be vulnerable to an active armour tank fleet and vice versa.
The min/maxers have already developed the main doctrines in their respective areas. I see this balancing more in line with having the varoius types of min/max ships/fleets/doctrines fit into a rock paper scissor formula based on skill, positioning and intelligence.
So I understand what you are saying about freedom etc but I think the reblancing efforts here are just making the choices we all already make more clearly defined and balanced on the whole. |
Din Chao
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
91
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 17:22:00 -
[79] - Quote
Acac Sunflyier wrote:I think ccp is just trying to get the broken ships not be broken. Like when was the last time you saw an Exequrer used in pvp? Or anything for that matter other than a newbie's first cruiser? Gas harvesting. But yeah, other than that... |
Taranius De Consolville
Lost Dawn Chaos Corrosive.
231
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 17:52:00 -
[80] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Lol. Why not? Are you afraid of the training wheels being taken off and you being responsible for how your ship actually functions?
So what ur saying is and this is EXACTLY what your saying...
Lets leave loads of ships useless and never used
Lets keep bringing out so many new ships that eve has thousands of cruisers and battle crusiers etc
Lets ignore the massive market crash that would follow
I pay for eve therefore it is done my way
My response?
**** off back to wow
oh and
Post with your main coward :) |
|
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 17:53:00 -
[81] - Quote
Roime wrote:Candidate for worst OP in GD September 2012
Before tiericide: tons of crappy ships After tiericide: tons of awesome ships that will bring a massive amount of FRESH into New Eden.
This means pure win to everybody, except maybe you. This is not just creating new FOTMs (which will evolve even without continuous balancing work btw), but a revolution in fleet comps.
I for one welcome our wonderful new T1 ships, and frankly haven't been this excited about any expansion before. Let's just hope that tiericide will be done about right in every class/iteration. Ideally we will be getting this then.
Another good thing is that we'll (hopefully) be getting more viable cheap ships for people to fly if they want some casual (or even not so casual maybe) pew. |
Seleene
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1946
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 19:43:00 -
[82] - Quote
I just had this thread pointed out to me, and not in a good way. CSM 7 Chairman My Blog - Where I say stuff Follow Seleene on Twitter! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2914
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 19:52:00 -
[83] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Freedom over slot layout, hardpoint numbers and types, engine types, etc.... Of course there have to be some limits on the designs; hard rules to govern the players, but ultimate choices of how a hull should be fit and used should be left to the players. By giving ship design over to the players, ccp breaks free of the balancing trap and frees up developer resources to actually focus on content. Hence for both the players and ccp less hulls equals more freedom.
Ahhhhh, I got it. You're saying that all EVE ships should be as well-balanced as the Tech 3 cruisers.
I'm sure that will mean the end of any kind of balancing work after that, certainly. Tech 3's were perfect right off the assembly line! Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1205
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 19:55:00 -
[84] - Quote
Barrogh Habalu wrote:Roime wrote:Candidate for worst OP in GD September 2012
Before tiericide: tons of crappy ships After tiericide: tons of awesome ships that will bring a massive amount of FRESH into New Eden.
This means pure win to everybody, except maybe you. This is not just creating new FOTMs (which will evolve even without continuous balancing work btw), but a revolution in fleet comps.
I for one welcome our wonderful new T1 ships, and frankly haven't been this excited about any expansion before. Let's just hope that tiericide will be done about right in every class/iteration. Ideally we will be getting this then. Another good thing is that we'll (hopefully) be getting more viable cheap ships for people to fly if they want some casual (or even not so casual maybe) pew.
Fozzie seems to be doing a great, great job. (Besides the drone thing)
I think we will see much more logistics and ewar used in the future, which puts more emphasis to gang comp planning and coordination... we might see more varied fleet comps <3
Also better logis and ewar pilots, when they can fly usable ships right from start, and not wait until they reach T2.
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
260
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 20:00:00 -
[85] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Freedom over slot layout, hardpoint numbers and types, engine types, etc.... Of course there have to be some limits on the designs; hard rules to govern the players, but ultimate choices of how a hull should be fit and used should be left to the players. By giving ship design over to the players, ccp breaks free of the balancing trap and frees up developer resources to actually focus on content. Hence for both the players and ccp less hulls equals more freedom. Ahhhhh, I got it. You're saying that all EVE ships should be as well-balanced as the Tech 3 cruisers. I'm sure that will mean the end of any kind of balancing work after that, certainly. Tech 3's were perfect right off the assembly line!
Yeah, there is always a baseline that is constantly getting tweaked. You can never have complete freedom, it just isn't possible from a design or balance standpoint. Currently, that baseline is already pretty diverse, you can choose from all sorts of modules how to build your ship. |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 20:01:00 -
[86] - Quote
Taranius De Consolville wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Lol. Why not? Are you afraid of the training wheels being taken off and you being responsible for how your ship actually functions? So what ur saying is and this is EXACTLY what your saying... Lets leave loads of ships useless and never used Lets keep bringing out so many new ships that eve has thousands of cruisers and battle crusiers etc Lets ignore the massive market crash that would follow I pay for eve therefore it is done my way My response? **** off back to wow oh and Post with your main coward :)
No -- what I am saying is consolidate the useless ships into fewer hulls, and give the players more freedom over how to design their own solutions to the balance problem. In particular, give the players the freedom to reconfigure slot locations, and hardpoint types and most importantly eliminate ship roles. Free up ship design to allow the players to create their own "roles" for ships. Tiericide is well meaning but misdirected. In six months or a year or so, ccp is going to be back to square one having to rebalance the ships to stamp out the new fotm that they created, in this round of ship balancing. Consequently it would be much better to throw the issue back to the players and let the players fix their own problems.
IMO people who want the dev's to design their ships for them are the real wow-babies -- so back to wow with you.
|
Seleene
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1946
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 20:03:00 -
[87] - Quote
Those who fail to adapt become a victim of Evolution. CSM 7 Chairman My Blog - Where I say stuff Follow Seleene on Twitter! |
Vol Arm'OOO
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
24
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 20:10:00 -
[88] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Freedom over slot layout, hardpoint numbers and types, engine types, etc.... Of course there have to be some limits on the designs; hard rules to govern the players, but ultimate choices of how a hull should be fit and used should be left to the players. By giving ship design over to the players, ccp breaks free of the balancing trap and frees up developer resources to actually focus on content. Hence for both the players and ccp less hulls equals more freedom. Ahhhhh, I got it. You're saying that all EVE ships should be as well-balanced as the Tech 3 cruisers. I'm sure that will mean the end of any kind of balancing work after that, certainly. Tech 3's were perfect right off the assembly line!
What you fail to recognize is that balance is an impossible goal. It cant be achieved. Maybe they can with alot of effort smooth out the bumps to bring the ships closer in alignment, but in the process they will make their players howl from nerfs. Consequently, it would be much better if ccp trusted the sandbox and gave the tools to players to make the ships themselves. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
293
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 20:41:00 -
[89] - Quote
Roime wrote: Fozzie seems to be doing a great, great job. (Besides the drone thing)
Drone thing? |
Lili Lu
428
|
Posted - 2012.09.14 20:42:00 -
[90] - Quote
Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Freedom over slot layout, hardpoint numbers and types, engine types, etc.... Of course there have to be some limits on the designs; hard rules to govern the players, but ultimate choices of how a hull should be fit and used should be left to the players. By giving ship design over to the players, ccp breaks free of the balancing trap and frees up developer resources to actually focus on content. Hence for both the players and ccp less hulls equals more freedom. Ahhhhh, I got it. You're saying that all EVE ships should be as well-balanced as the Tech 3 cruisers. I'm sure that will mean the end of any kind of balancing work after that, certainly. Tech 3's were perfect right off the assembly line! What you fail to recognize is that balance is an impossible goal. It cant be achieved. Maybe they can with alot of effort smooth out the bumps to bring the ships closer in alignment, but in the process they will make their players howl from nerfs. Consequently, it would be much better if ccp trusted the sandbox and gave the tools to players to make the ships themselves.
To support a rebalancing is not the same as saying there can be perfect balance. The game will always change. It already has been. There have been plenty of nerfs and buffs. It is the pace and scale that will change. The pace has been very slow for years. The process will be speeding up and it will stay continuous. Just because you are butthurt to lose whatever op ship you are currently flying is no reason not to try to fix the situation.
If CCP doesn't put an effort into rebalancing the game we will end up with a stagnant Drakes and Tengus Online. Everyone rolls Caldari and everyone flies those ships. The game stagnates and bleeds players that don't want to be Drake number 9000. The game dies.
Now stfu and regret your OP. Your prescription, to do nothing, is the sureest way to lose player base and have the game die. It is as stupid an argument, to do what you ask, as your avatar protrait looks.
edit - And post with something other than your noob corp trolling alt. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |