And yes, in case you're mentally challenged, of course it's me failing and you should apply to my corp for that conclusion.

No - eve isn't dying yet again.
Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.

I personally absolutely support Eve as I think that Eve is the only true MMO due to being single-sharded and having a mostly player driven economy, but recent balance passes are insulting to older players to say the least.

People find change insulting? Isn't one of the primary tenets of this game Adapt of Die? Personally I love change, it forces people to think in different ways and expand their views both in-game and (indirectly) in RL. I can't stand stagnant conservatives who oppose change simply because it causes them to have to use their brains once in a while.

so what is so bad about the rebalancing? because i am well not a very old player 2,5 years almost but defo not new and i am pretty content with rebalancing so far.

Well - I have characters at 140, 110 and 40 mill SP - can't see a use for the higher 2 because a T1 frig or cruiser performs plainly on par with their T2 counterparts for a fraction of the price, BS outside blobs are downright rubbish and HAC rebalance plans are distilled bukkake.

Can't see what I use the old chars for, can't see anything I want to train the new one into.

Well - I have characters at 140, 110 and 40 mill SP - can't see a use for the higher 2 because a T1 frig or cruiser performs plainly on par with their T2 counterparts for a fraction of the price, BS outside blobs are downright rubbish and HAC rebalance plans are distilled bukkake.

Can't see what I use the old chars for, can't see anything I want to train the new one into.

HAC rebalance plans are distilled bukkake.

Except the higher SP characters would be able to load out the T1 frigate better (much better) than a newbie character. Unless those high SP ones are missing basic skills in favour of getting into more advanced ships. I also dislike people that do that, what a huge waste of time.

Once you have Frig 5 - T2 guns, tank and support skills what else is there?


So after maybe 10mil sp what advantage is there to the players who invested isk into better ships/fits if T1 ships are now better than faction ships (Frigates are a great example) ?

The high sp players don't 'magically' have Frigates trained to 11.

No - eve isn't dying yet again.



Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.

10mil SP isn't what I'd consider a newbie. Newish maybe, but not a newbie.

Though to answer your question, you don't take the best ship you can fit for your SP to a fight, you take the ship best suited to the role needed in the fight. The advantage is that the higher SP players have more options in their roles.

No - eve isn't dying yet again.

However, Dust has proven to be a total failure as predicted.

Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.

I personally absolutely support Eve as I think that Eve is the only true MMO due to being single-sharded and having a mostly player driven economy, but recent balance passes are insulting to older players to say the least.

Is that contributed to Dust failing or is Eve itself failing due to bad balancing decisions related to Dusts failing?

Discuss.

And yes, in case you're mentally challenged, of course it's me failing and you should apply to my corp for that conclusion.

The OP is right.

Some T1 ships have been buffed way too far. The Incursis and Vexor tanking abilities are over the top now.
Nothing of equivalent size and Tier can 1v1 some of the fits going around now for those ships.

The ancillary repper modules were not properly taken into account with the Tiercide changes and have almost broken the game.

And Dust should have been great but CCP just keep pushing people away from it.

Apart from the poor decision to make it console based (Hope they fired the moron who came up with that genius idea) - Most people who dumped all their SP into a particular fit were screwed over in a patch a few weeks ago forcing them to stop playing while the passive SP catches up to allow their fits again.
Or
They could grind to the SP cap for 3 weeks to get the SP but no one with 1/2 a brain would grind for stuff they could already previously use in a console FPS.

It seems that it was an attempt/scam to get people to buy the SP boosters that backfired on CCP and rightly so.

Most like myself found their entire fits in dust to now be no longer usable.
I just stopped playing Dust at that point and I am an eve player used to CCP's poor judgement and lack of understanding of their own player base.
Imagine how the console kiddies would have felt logging in to find their suits and fits useless.


I have no urge to return to Dust. It is pointless trying to progress in it when you might have that progress taken away in a patch.
Dust had potential but deserves to die just for not being what it was advertised as - there is no link between the games except the orbital strike mechanic which is not interesting in any way.

Now your argument that higher skill characters should be better at everything (that is what I took from it anyways) is also wrong. EVE developers have always been stressing that if you specialize you will always be able to reach the same effectiveness of a higher skilled player . More skill points will give you more options but will not give you a permanent advantage over newer players, and that is a very good game mechanic (imo).

Is that contributed to Dust failing or is Eve itself failing due to bad balancing decisions related to Dusts failing?

Discuss.

And yes, in case you're mentally challenged, of course it's me failing and you should apply to my corp for that conclusion.

Man, I totally missed this thread, probably because I don't have Large Collidable Objects on my overview.

People find change insulting? Isn't one of the primary tenets of this game Adapt of Die? Personally I love change, it forces people to think in different ways and expand their views both in-game and (indirectly) in RL. I can't stand stagnant conservatives who oppose change simply because it causes them to have to use their brains once in a while.

Well - I have characters at 140, 110 and 40 mill SP - can't see a use for the higher 2 because a T1 frig or cruiser performs plainly on par with their T2 counterparts for a fraction of the price, BS outside blobs are downright rubbish and HAC rebalance plans are distilled bukkake.

Can't see what I use the old chars for, can't see anything I want to train the new one into.

From my point of view, being one of the few remainign WiSers around, I sure would had prefered to have all those DUST millions thrown into EVE avatar gameplay, but so far can't really blame DUST for the demise of avatars in EVE. CCP's lack of vision and "getting it" are solely to blame for that, and a time will come when lookign back, the failure to implement avatar content will be deemed one of the reasons why EVE died.

I don't play dust, so this will about EVE.

It will help if you look at it from a developer's point of view. When they decide to do any sort of change it is based on numbers and stats. It is not (usually at least) based on a whim, personal biases towards ship types, or just f ******* their playerbase. rightly so sometimes you can make wrong assumptions from these numbers and do something wrong.

Now for the examples:

When they nerfed heavy missiles, they didn't just do it because some people felt it was overpowered, but they did it because heavy missiles were by far the top killers of pvp ships. So their heavy usage means they are overpowered and need to be brought in line with other weapon systems. Does that mean that some niche role of heavy missiles got an undeserved nerf? maybe (such as site runners), but overall the change will usually bring more "balance" to the game.

Now to the change of the t1 cruisers and frigates. Now rightly so they got buffed, but still t2 can easily beat t1 any day of the week (assuming similar real life pilot skills). But now instead of t2 trumping t1 in a hilarious way, t1 stands a chance if a certain gang does it right. The change of t1 cruisers and frigates didn't come at a whim, the numbers showed that in any pvp encounter they were horribly under powered. Before the change no serious pilot flew t1 frigates or cruisers because they were simply so weak, and that is (in my humble opinion unbalanced). From personal experience I can tell you now we fly moa's, vexors. In null caracels are finally a real doctrine. It doesn't matter how you feel, what matters is the numbers, and when any kind of ship is being used relatively less than its counterparts, then it is under powered. That is why the zealot didn't changed much and the eagle got a huge buff, people actually use zealots and nobody used eagles. It is all about the usage number and stats.

Don't get me wrong they can still **** it up and over nerf or over buff something, but from the current meta you can see a wider and healthier array of ship usages, which means that the balance was a great success.

Now your argument that higher skill characters should be better at everything (that is what I took from it anyways) is also wrong. EVE developers have always been stressing that if you specialize you will always be able to reach the same effectiveness of a higher skilled player . More skill points will give you more options but will not give you a permanent advantage over newer players, and that is a very good game mechanic (imo).

Some people will always get hurt with any change in the game, but what is most important is the overall health and balance of the game, and the game is definitely healthier and more balanced than a year ago.

Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.

Current ship rebalance focuses solely around absolute beginners, as anything requiring more than 10m is nerfbatted into the ground compared to T1 frigs and cruisers in an attempt to make generations of old players quit so isk is removed from the economy.

Once you have Frig 5 - T2 guns, tank and support skills what else is there?


So after maybe 10mil sp what advantage is there to the players who invested isk into better ships/fits if T1 ships are now better than faction ships (Frigates are a great example) ?

The high sp players don't 'magically' have Frigates trained to 11.

No, that's done because EvE couldn't exist without the usual means to play PvP (cheap methods to fight).

Totally. If only they were smart, they would limit the ability to be effective in PvP to the top 1% of the playerbase and leave everyone else as cannon fodder.

I'm sure that would attract new players and result in growth in an MMO after ten years, something that's almost unprecedented in the industry instead of what EVE is experiencing which is a shrinking playerbase due to the ability of new players to compete.

I don't play dust, so this will about EVE.

It will help if you look at it from a developer's point of view. When they decide to do any sort of change it is based on numbers and stats. It is not (usually at least) based on a whim, personal biases towards ship types, or just f ******* their playerbase. rightly so sometimes you can make wrong assumptions from these numbers and do something wrong.

Now for the examples:

When they nerfed heavy missiles, they didn't just do it because some people felt it was overpowered, but they did it because heavy missiles were by far the top killers of pvp ships. So their heavy usage means they are overpowered and need to be brought in line with other weapon systems. Does that mean that some niche role of heavy missiles got an undeserved nerf? maybe (such as site runners), but overall the change will usually bring more "balance" to the game.

Now to the change of the t1 cruisers and frigates. Now rightly so they got buffed, but still t2 can easily beat t1 any day of the week (assuming similar real life pilot skills). But now instead of t2 trumping t1 in a hilarious way, t1 stands a chance if a certain gang does it right. The change of t1 cruisers and frigates didn't come at a whim, the numbers showed that in any pvp encounter they were horribly under powered. Before the change no serious pilot flew t1 frigates or cruisers because they were simply so weak, and that is (in my humble opinion unbalanced). From personal experience I can tell you now we fly moa's, vexors. In null caracels are finally a real doctrine. It doesn't matter how you feel, what matters is the numbers, and when any kind of ship is being used relatively less than its counterparts, then it is under powered. That is why the zealot didn't changed much and the eagle got a huge buff, people actually use zealots and nobody used eagles. It is all about the usage number and stats.

Don't get me wrong they can still **** it up and over nerf or over buff something, but from the current meta you can see a wider and healthier array of ship usages, which means that the balance was a great success.

Now your argument that higher skill characters should be better at everything (that is what I took from it anyways) is also wrong. EVE developers have always been stressing that if you specialize you will always be able to reach the same effectiveness of a higher skilled player . More skill points will give you more options but will not give you a permanent advantage over newer players, and that is a very good game mechanic (imo).

Some people will always get hurt with any change in the game, but what is most important is the overall health and balance of the game, and the game is definitely healthier and more balanced than a year ago.

Most T2 ships haven't even been touched yet, and even the HAC proposals are only at the 1st pass stage and will be tweaked considerably before it's all done.

Seems a bit early to compare the two.

...you tinfoils do understand that Dust has not "taken away" development from EVE, right? It's been created by a different team of people; a team of people who would not be working for CCP if Dust did not exist.

But anyways, the point is this: It really feels like to me that all the "rebalanced" ships are being designed for "SPECIFIC ROLES" and they are losing a lot of their unique but functional builds. We're losing a lot of utility highs.

...you tinfoils do understand that Dust has not "taken away" development from EVE, right? It's been created by a different team of people; a team of people who would not be working for CCP if Dust did not exist.

distilled bukkake.

elitism

facts

...you tinfoils do understand that Dust has not "taken away" development from EVE, right? It's been created by a different team of people; a team of people who would not be working for CCP if Dust did not exist.

And CCP just threw the baby with the water and dismissed WiS and its abbility to add another pile of Mikado sticks by the hideous "core gameplay" mess.

i agree with all and may I add:

this is not only related to WiS. ANY strategig development in EVE was halted, it's WiS, as well as player owned stations, sovreignity redesign and much more. Basically anything structural, not limited to mere tables updates, retexturing and light code optimization has been stopped.

They seems simply unable to have a "vision" for EVE and working on something else (console gamse, mobile games, VR games, comics, merchandeising, movies...). All this is founded with EVE subscriptions.

Now this is going on since years (3-4 at least) now. CCP is gifted to have a very loyal core playerbase and not having competitors on the market. But this cannot last forever.

I would venture to suggest that the Sean Decker chap was been brought in specifically to deal with DUST and its poor player retention rates etc.

So? I bet he's receiving a pretty hefty salary - some of which may be paid with my subscription fees. Personally, I couldn't care less about dust (I own a PS3, however playing an FPS on it is about practical as trying to fly in a rowing boat, so wouldn't even touch it if hell froze over).

Console FPS players are mostly lower class kids not literate enough to operate a proper computer or extremely casual family guys, both with a short attention span, little dedication and a focus on graphics - both demographics being quite the opposite of what I'd consider most eve players, whereas dust doesn't seem to provide enough instant arcade gratification or the graphics these people are after (seriously - from watching gameplay videos, dust is at a stage the first Quake 3 expansion was at, but more choppy with less players per map).


Trying to join both groups was about as fruitful as trying to transplant a dying rats head on a slowly decaying human body and expect it to live and create offspring.


I have stated multiple times that I wished dust to be successful, despite always doubting it ever would, so it would create revenue that could be invested back into eve.

However the point of this thread is the feeling that dust in its expected failing influences eve balancing towards said instant gratification gameplay as depicted in curent balance passes.

On a side note, the only positive Influence I contribute to dust is the fact that it diverts devs from writing code for WIS, thus keeping the eve client somewhat cleaner

Totally. If only they were smart, they would limit the ability to be effective in PvP to the top 1% of the playerbase and leave everyone else as cannon fodder.

I'm sure that would attract new players and result in growth in an MMO after ten years, something that's almost unprecedented in the industry instead of what EVE is experiencing which is a shrinking playerbase due to the ability of new players to compete.

You should absolutely work for CCP and rescue EVE before it's too late.

Wait, except.

Right.

OP, when Ace Uoweme shows up in your thread and starts sharing wisdom you know you've probably wandered off into nonsense-ville at some point.

And you're a dinosaur that likes your turf and would prefer to go extinct instead of adapting

EvE is only growing via multiboxing

It also shows CCP doesn't have the built in user base to jump start another venture (like Blizzard did with Diablo III).