| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Merin Ryskin
   |
Posted - 2006.05.03 23:49:00 -
[61]
How about instead of searching for absurd ways to rationalize the high masses, we ask why they need that high mass.
It's not for roleplaying reasons. It makes no sense to have smaller, under-armored ships be the same mass as flying armor blocks.
It's not for game balance reasons anymore. The issue that forced the changes has been fixed, and the high masses are just an obsolete leftover. But what game balance effects would lowering the masses produce?
* Better turn rate. This is hardly relevant when Caldari ships are as a whole long-range snipers. You don't want to be caught at a range where high turn rate is essential, so having that high turn rate is about as important as having +5% better damage to civilian railguns per level. The only thing it would do is make the ships less frustrating to fly.
* Better warp range. I fail to see how having a Caldari ship require 3 warps to cross a system actually accomplishes anything but annoying its pilot.
* More benefit from MWD/AB. Of course they start with a lower base speed, so the end result isn't going to be faster than other races.
So there's no reason to keep the high masses, and some very good ones to lower them (player frustration is a bad thing). So the obvious answer is to cut the masses to where they belong, the second lightest in their class.
|
Kelgen Thann
|
Posted - 2006.05.03 23:54:00 -
[62]
Caldari used to have lower mass, scan resolution etc. a long time ago.
Missles were seen as too powerful and the scorpion too powerful an EW ship. To balance this about a year or so before the missle changes, the stats on caldari ships were changed.
When the missle changes and EW changes went into effect, the ship stats were not altered.
|
Jinx Barker
|
Posted - 2006.05.04 00:03:00 -
[63]
All I have to say is Thank God, more people are actually seing the imballance.... as Nikolai pointed out... another thread of over 6 pages now exists in GD, where we have exaustedly pointed out the fact that Caldari ships are gimped. We need Devs to take a look at the ships and do a review, at least let us be as agile as Amarr!
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=324151
|
Dust Angel
|
Posted - 2006.05.04 00:56:00 -
[64]
Hopefully tux isant a hater and will look into this, as well as blasters.
_____________________________________
Stressed out with empire politics?
Sansha's Nation helps clear your mind.
|
Cade Morrigan
|
Posted - 2006.05.04 02:53:00 -
[65]
 Originally by: Merin Ryskin
How about instead of searching for absurd ways to rationalize the high masses, we ask why they need that high mass.
It's not for roleplaying reasons. It makes no sense to have smaller, under-armored ships be the same mass as flying armor blocks.
It's not for game balance reasons anymore. The issue that forced the changes has been fixed, and the high masses are just an obsolete leftover. But what game balance effects would lowering the masses produce?
* Better turn rate. This is hardly relevant when Caldari ships are as a whole long-range snipers. You don't want to be caught at a range where high turn rate is essential, so having that high turn rate is about as important as having +5% better damage to civilian railguns per level. The only thing it would do is make the ships less frustrating to fly.
* Better warp range. I fail to see how having a Caldari ship require 3 warps to cross a system actually accomplishes anything but annoying its pilot.
* More benefit from MWD/AB. Of course they start with a lower base speed, so the end result isn't going to be faster than other races.
So there's no reason to keep the high masses, and some very good ones to lower them (player frustration is a bad thing). So the obvious answer is to cut the masses to where they belong, the second lightest in their class.
Exquisite post! I would now ask that you send a frozen sample of your DNA over here so my wife can give birth to your child.
-= Save the Gila! Fix its grid and cpu! =-
|
Jim Raynor
|
Posted - 2006.05.04 03:57:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Kelgen Thann
Caldari used to have lower mass, scan resolution etc. a long time ago.
Missles were seen as too powerful and the scorpion too powerful an EW ship. To balance this about a year or so before the missle changes, the stats on caldari ships were changed.
When the missle changes and EW changes went into effect, the ship stats were not altered.
caldari always had the highest lock times i believe caldari battleships were highest at 9 seconds, minmatar fastest at 6, its just with sensor boosters any ship could be made to lock in 1-2 seconds.
------
FPDOMS MINER KILLBOARD |
Alistaire Mirabel
|
Posted - 2006.05.04 13:45:00 -
[67]
We need Tux to look at both threads... someone say something to Sir Tuxford and point him here. I dont think we are asking too much, just to be as competetive as other races, my ships are as agile as briks, I dont want to drive Amarr, everyone is driving Amarr ships nowdays, like they used to drive Ravens before, I presume.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |