| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
273
   |
Posted - 2013.03.20 18:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
After a near decade this game is surprisingly well balanced for an RPG.
Rule of thumb is if you think something is without use then you really need to re-evaluate it and the context around its use because something huge just passed under your radar.
This goes double so for the people who currently assume that armour tanking is worthless.
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
279
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 00:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:After a near decade this game is surprisingly well balanced for an RPG.
Rule of thumb is if you think something is without use then you really need to re-evaluate it and the context around its use because something huge just passed under your radar.
This goes double so for the people who currently assume that armour tanking is worthless. You can't really compare this game to other RPGs because there is nothing really like it. EvE is too unique in that regard.
Yeah you keep saying that but in the end we're still just spinning around our opponent, kicking each other in the shins with the victor being the one who brought the biggest boots.
The difference between and EVE and other RPGs come in the form of null sec, the cost of losing and the economy.
Ship to ship balance is as RPG cookie cutter as it gets.
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
279
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 01:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
Inkarr Hashur wrote:Liang Nuren wrote:Inkarr Hashur wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Ship to ship balance is as RPG cookie cutter as it gets.
What? Hmmmm, it would be absolutely trivial to go through Eve and categorize ships+fits as being MDPS (Gallente), RDPS (Amarr or LR weapons), Support/Heals (CS/Logi), or Support/Control (Recons). Of course, there's the mix/match of ship setup and unconventional setups thrown in the mix, but ultimately conventional setups are conventional because of how well they work. The biggest differences I see are the profound lack of AOE and DOT in Eve combining with the utterly boolean state of our control effects. Once you get snared (webbed) in Eve, you will remain so until you get range (ha ha ha) or the module is deactivated. Anyway, there are differences, sure... but they're not so large. And many of the same game design balance decisions are made in Eve as are made everywhere else. Maybe, just maybe, because conventional setups are conventional because they work.  -Liang Except there's also tracking and agility, balance versus wallet, balance between and among ship sizes, I don't think you would approach balancing internet spaceships online the way one would go about balancing most other MMOs.
It's a great game so calm down but Eve is not some gem of supreme brilliance in the gaming world. It's another MMO and no more complicated in pvp balance than for example WoW.
Yes there's agility and tracking speed and fall off range but those only seem complicated because the formulas are right in our face. It's no more complicated than a game where players fight in mixed melee and range, with stuns, fears, roots, free running and knockbacks, mana drains, silence, dots, absorption shields and god knows what more. Then take all of it and try to balance it in everyone versus everyone.
Eve at least has ship classes that don't have to be balanced against each other. They don't even have to bother trying to balance a T1 frigate against a battleship or a battlecruiser against a Carrier to make it fair.
Eve is pretty well balanced. Most fights are over before they even start just based on the ship types. Solo pvp is not even on the map.
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
281
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 03:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:Diesel47 wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:After a near decade this game is surprisingly well balanced for an RPG.
Rule of thumb is if you think something is without use then you really need to re-evaluate it and the context around its use because something huge just passed under your radar.
This goes double so for the people who currently assume that armour tanking is worthless. You can't really compare this game to other RPGs because there is nothing really like it. EvE is too unique in that regard. Yeah you keep saying that but in the end we're still just spinning around our opponent, kicking each other in the shins with the victor being the one who brought the biggest boots. If you think that the depth of PvP in this game can be summed down to pushing orbit and whoever has the better fit / skills = winner then you are bad at PvP have much to learn. 
Skill is part of it but Eve is more rock-paper-scissors than most RPGs.
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
282
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 10:23:00 -
[5] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:And you are basing this on what experience? The 15 or less total engagements you've had?
If you just jumped into PvP and are not having good performance... Don't try to blame the game as being shallow for your shortcomings.
This attitude is one of the things that can hinder your development as a competent PvPer. Go watch some PvP videos with pilot commentary (kil2, eveiseasy), or listen to a few small gang PvP podcasts and attempt to try and understand what they are even talking about. You will realize that the PvP in this game has much more depth than any of those other theme park MMOs.
No I'm basing it on how the ships are designed and customized. If you pick the right harderners and the opponent the wrong ones. What type of ammo, weapons and range. We specialize against something with every choice we make and it makes us weaker against other things. This is balanced with fleet warfare. As there's no solo pvp in Eve.
And please do not throw meaningless words like "depth" at me. Especially not about pvp balance. When compared to some of the larger MMOs out there, Eve is a basement side project. The complete lack of 1vs1 balance in Eve may very well be a financial decision. That they don't have the manpower and income for it to be worth trying.
You also need to drop the fanboy attitude. Off with the rose tinted goggles. Eve is a game like any other. Any preference we have is just personal opinion. Eve is not some masterpiece that outshines the rest. It's just different. A very niched game for a very niched audience.
If you look at it from an objective standpoint Eve contains a lot of corner cutting due to the fact that it's made by a smaller developer.
"different" is the word you seek. Not deeper or more complex or meaningful. Just different. Aligning and burning out of another ships range or moving close to keep the turrets from tracking you is no more deeper than simple kiting an opponent in WoW or jumping out of their AOE effects and closing the distance as a melee character.
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
282
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 11:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
Your example of supreme skill was a dice roll on the warp distance?
All you did was put 3 cups in front of the enemy labelled 0, 50 and 100 and then gambled victory on him "finding the ball"
if he had randomly picked 50 and landed on you. Would your inevitable defeat meant he outskilled you for randomly picking the right distance?
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
293
|
Posted - 2013.03.21 21:03:00 -
[7] - Quote
I still disagree with you on the topic of balance but you are right that I have derailed your thread and for that I do apologize,
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
307
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 15:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:
And please do not throw meaningless words like "depth" at me. Especially not about pvp balance. When compared to some of the larger MMOs out there, Eve is a basement side project. The complete lack of 1vs1 balance in Eve may very well be a financial decision. That they don't have the manpower and income for it to be worth trying.
If you look at it from an objective standpoint Eve contains a lot of corner cutting due to the fact that it's made by a smaller developer.
"different" is the word you seek. Not deeper or more complex or meaningful. Just different. Aligning and burning out of another ships range or moving close to keep the turrets from tracking you is no more deeper than simple kiting an opponent in WoW or jumping out of their AOE effects and closing the distance as a melee character.
I'm curious,how many other games are there where there is a need to balance pvp fights that scale up into the thousands? While I do think that CCP is very sluggish when it comes to making balancing changes, I also think it's in no small part because the pvp in eve IS deep, moreso than in most other MMOs, and this is mainly because of how quickly it scales up, as well as the huge amount of meta-gaming. Balancing a 1v1 fight is easy, hell, balancing a 10v10 fight is easy, but doing so in a way that won't **** up the 1000v1000 fights is not. As for the topic at hand; if SBs are useless, then it's a good sign that ASBs still need a nerf, there's already enough discrepancy between active armor and shield tanking, we don't need to be making it any worse.
Actually the more ships you have the easier it gets to balance. Which is why Eve is balanced around fleet pvp and not solo pvp. Eve has no solo pvp balance. But on the balance Eve attempts to achieve (fleet) the balance is pretty good.
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
307
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 16:37:00 -
[9] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Actually the more ships you have the easier it gets to balance. Which is why Eve is balanced around fleet pvp and not solo pvp. Eve has no solo pvp balance. But on the balance Eve attempts to achieve (fleet) the balance is pretty good.
How do you figure?
Because you have more variation on either side. Ships and setups varied in the hundreds that all do what they do best against their ideal targets with plenty on either side.
I'm surprised you would even call 1 vs 1 balance easy. What 2 ships fighting against each other are even closed balanced in this game?
Blizzard has been trying to balance 1vs1 for 8 years and you call it easy?
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
307
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 18:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:Cambarus wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:
Actually the more ships you have the easier it gets to balance. Which is why Eve is balanced around fleet pvp and not solo pvp. Eve has no solo pvp balance. But on the balance Eve attempts to achieve (fleet) the balance is pretty good.
How do you figure? Because you have more variation on either side. Ships and setups varied in the hundreds that all do what they do best against their ideal targets with plenty on either side. I'm surprised you would even call 1 vs 1 balance easy. What 2 ships fighting against each other are even closed balanced in this game? Blizzard has been trying to balance 1vs1 for 8 years and you call it easy? So when you were talking about "other large MMOs" you meant WoW. That does explain a few things :) Typically in larger fleets each side follows a certain doctrine. You don't just show up in whatever you have, there's usually one or 2 ship types that make up the bulk of the fleet, and the only time you show up in anything else is that you don't have the skills or isk for the main ship type. There isn't really much variation on either side when it's 100 carriers+support vs 100 tengus+support. You either fly what the main fleet is flying, or fly something that compliments them well.
What does that have to do with the balance?
We miss you Saede. |
Angelique Duchemin
Serenity Prime
Kraken.
307
|
Posted - 2013.03.22 19:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
Cambarus wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:
What does that have to do with the balance?
You said large fights are easier to balance because of increased variation, which is false, because there isn't that much variation. Fleets are built to support each other, not just thrown together, which throws a whole new level of meta-gaming into the problem of balancing. It's not just "how does A fare against B C and D?" It's "how does A fare when mixed in with K-P against literally every possible combination of fleet types?"
Simple because the enemy brings A's too so it doesn't matter that much how A B C D fare against each other because both sides bring all of them.
So even if A vaporizes B at range while B can close the distance to C and destroy C. All that means is that either sides letters attack the ones they fare best against. The more ships you have in the mix the more balanced the fight as a whole becomes
Your example would only be a problem if say one side brought 100 Carriers and the other side brought 100 Dreads but that's just the 1 vs 1 formula on a larger scale. In reality either side will bring a good ratio of each whenever possible and the balance remains.
Each ship and setup has a strength and a weakness that is is represented by another ship and setup and the more ships you have the more likely it becomes that it faces a ship it fares well against and that it faces an opponent that matches its own weakness.
We miss you Saede. |
| |
|