Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
4532
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:09:00 -
[31] - Quote
All this would do is make people sub divide fleets into a bunch of smaller groups.
It's pretty much the same suggestion as "nerf alliance numbers because Grr Goons!", when all that would do is make coalition logistics a little bit harder.
They've already been circumventing fleet size restrictions for a while, this wouldn't be any different, just slightly more of a pain in the ass.
The solution is just to fix the damned ships, not to make the game less fun. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
-áPsychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:15:00 -
[32] - Quote
The fact you expect this to work indicates you have no idea what you are talking about.
Nullsec alliances routinely circumvent the fleet size limits as part of any CTA. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
283
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:19:00 -
[33] - Quote
THere is a way to broadcast targets and reps to more than 255? I think if thats possible it might fit into the realm of an exploit. Could you please elaborate. All ideas have conditions and constraints to consider as well as the regard of inteested parties. |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:20:00 -
[34] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:THere is a way to broadcast targets and reps to more than 255? I think if thats possible it might fit into the realm of an exploit. Could you please elaborate. All ideas have conditions and constraints to consider as well as the regard of inteested parties.
Oh man, he has us now
I used to PVP and FC before the broadcast system was implemented, so all it takes is not being lazy and having organized and disciplined comms.
But if that is outside the scope of your fleet, you might have a problem Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
283
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:22:00 -
[35] - Quote
multiply the difficulties and people passing on orders times five, do the chances for mistakes and fatigue increase? |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:25:00 -
[36] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:multiply the difficulties and people passing on orders times five, do the chances for mistakes and fatigue increase?
I don't recall it being that much harder before broadcasts. You just took more advantage of watch lists, listening to the FC's verbal instructions (because "Primary ABC in the Drake" is so hard to understand) and kicking disruptive people from fleet (and primarying them of course).
Broadcasts only made people lazy, they were at no point needed for huge blob combat to happen. Heck, blobs happened before alliance level standings were even implemented!
So please continue to explain how your plan hurts people like me. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2606
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:27:00 -
[37] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Dinsdale, you may have some point about how a lot of the changes lately have favoured Null in the overall scheme, but really, trying to claim that T3's getting nerfed is a Null Conspiracy? T3's are out of balance, they are more specialised than T2, rather than better than T1 & broader & more adaptable than T2. That's been known for years.
Anyway, the way to break the blob. Line of Fire mechanics, more space terrain that matters & affects tactics, and spreading fights out more. So a fleets versatility starts to matter.
It is not some dark conspiracy. It is pretty straightforward.
Null sec cartels cannot control the income streams from wormhole space. Though I am sure that the cartels have a large presence in wormholes, they can't control them as they have null sec. And how many null sec groups have a huge FW presence?? Lots. And we all can see how the cartels have directed the destruction of high sec income.
The last place they have no real control on the economy is wormhole space. So they are directing the dev's to trash T3's so less are sold, hurting wh players, and everyone else who likes to fly them.
As for T3's being over-powered, that is silly. Always has been. They have never been OP.
When I can fit a T1 cruiser to outgun any T3 but a gank Proteus, they are far from overpowered. Do they have great resists, and excellent tanks? You bet. But when you end up paying 40 times what you do for a T1 cruiser, yeah, they should be vastly superior.
I own a Proteus and Loki. Loki was setup for low sec exploration work. Proteus was set up for mission running, and was about to be retasked for low sec mission work.
Then the first drone nerf hit with the wrecking of drone range with the Omni's. Then the 2nd direct nerf to T2 sentries hit.
So I guess I will either stick with a terrible DPS Loki for low sec work, or upgrade to a Stratios, that still is marginally better than then Loki in DPS, even after the wrecking of drone damage. And once the T3 nerf hits, the Loki won't be able to tank or apply any kind of DPS. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:29:00 -
[38] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:Dinsdale, you may have some point about how a lot of the changes lately have favoured Null in the overall scheme, but really, trying to claim that T3's getting nerfed is a Null Conspiracy? T3's are out of balance, they are more specialised than T2, rather than better than T1 & broader & more adaptable than T2. That's been known for years.
Anyway, the way to break the blob. Line of Fire mechanics, more space terrain that matters & affects tactics, and spreading fights out more. So a fleets versatility starts to matter. It is not some dark conspiracy. It is pretty straightforward. Null sec cartels cannot control the income streams from wormhole space. Though I am sure that the cartels have a large presence in wormholes, they can't control them as they have null sec. And how many null sec groups have a huge FW presence?? Lots. And we all can see how the cartels have directed the destruction of high sec income. The last place they have no real control on the economy is wormhole space. So they are directing the dev's to trash T3's so less are sold, hurting wh players, and everyone else who likes to fly them. As for T3's being over-powered, that is silly. Always has been. They have never been OP. When I can fit a T1 cruiser to outgun any T3 but a gank Proteus, they are far from overpowered. Do they have great resists, and excellent tanks? You bet. But when you end up paying 40 times what you do for a T1 cruiser, yeah, they should be vastly superior. I own a Proteus and Loki. Loki was setup for low sec exploration work. Proteus was set up for mission running, and was about to be retasked for low sec mission work. Then the first drone nerf hit with the wrecking of drone range with the Omni's. Then the 2nd direct nerf to T2 sentries hit. So I guess I will either stick with a terrible DPS Loki for low sec work, or upgrade to a Stratios, that still is marginally better than then Loki in DPS, even after the wrecking of drone damage. And once the T3 nerf hits, the Loki won't be able to tank or apply any kind of DPS.
You know that nullsec loves Lokis right? They're usually setup as a brick tanked armor Huginn. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
283
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:37:00 -
[39] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:Muestereate wrote:multiply the difficulties and people passing on orders times five, do the chances for mistakes and fatigue increase? I don't recall it being that much harder before broadcasts. You just took more advantage of watch lists, listening to the FC's verbal instructions (because "Primary ABC in the Drake" is so hard to understand ) and kicking disruptive people from fleet (and primarying them of course). Broadcasts only made people lazy, they were at no point needed for huge blob combat to happen. Heck, blobs happened before alliance level standings were even implemented! So please continue to explain how your plan hurts people like me. EDIT: Anything you need a fleet and broadcast to do can also be done using a chat channel and proper overview setup.
I'm sorry if you interpreted my idea as a personal attack on you. I tried not to offend any particular person or group though its largest impact would be very large fleets that magnify very minor imbalances and overstress hardware and personnel resources by exposing these minor imbalances instead as broken mechanics.
|
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:45:00 -
[40] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:masternerdguy wrote:Muestereate wrote:multiply the difficulties and people passing on orders times five, do the chances for mistakes and fatigue increase? I don't recall it being that much harder before broadcasts. You just took more advantage of watch lists, listening to the FC's verbal instructions (because "Primary ABC in the Drake" is so hard to understand ) and kicking disruptive people from fleet (and primarying them of course). Broadcasts only made people lazy, they were at no point needed for huge blob combat to happen. Heck, blobs happened before alliance level standings were even implemented! So please continue to explain how your plan hurts people like me. EDIT: Anything you need a fleet and broadcast to do can also be done using a chat channel and proper overview setup. I'm sorry if you interpreted my idea as a personal attack on you. I tried not to offend any particular person or group though its largest impact would be very large fleets that magnify very minor imbalances and overstress hardware and personnel resources by exposing these minor imbalances instead as broken mechanics.
Actually, I find this pretty funny.
I've made a case how I will adapt and thrive despite your efforts, however you are unable to adapt to current game mechanics.
Things are only impossible until they are not. |
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2149
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:50:00 -
[41] - Quote
What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. Expansions should build on previous mechanics not completely rewrite them.
We started the game in 2003 with torpedo's that shot out to 100km or so and today we should still have torpedo's that shoot to 100k or so.
Same goes for the all the random, annoying and sometimes ridiculous changes that occur. Build on it, don't rebuild it constantly. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Rhes
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
754
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:53:00 -
[42] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. So they should keep doing exactly what they have been doing since the Summer of Rage?
EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:56:00 -
[43] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. Expansions should build on previous mechanics not completely rewrite them.
We started the game in 2003 with torpedo's that shot out to 100km or so and today we should still have torpedo's that shoot to 100k or so.
Same goes for the all the random, annoying and sometimes ridiculous changes that occur. Build on it, don't rebuild it constantly.
Are you kidding?
Back in my day, the Raven could 1 shot any frigate with torps from 80km+! That same raven could hit 2.5km/s! They've certainly changed that!
And the only ships that shoot torps anywhere near those ranges get huge bonuses to missile velocity and flight time. Maybe you can do it in a Golem, but certainly not in a raven. Stealth bombers have great torp range, but that is because they used to fire cruise missiles (for their improved range) and when CCP rebalanced them to fire torps, which do more damage, they wanted to maintain the long range property.
Put torps on any non bonused ship and they're unlikely to go anywhere near 100km. And they certainly don't annihilate frigates in 1 salvo anymore. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Marsha Mallow
212
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:57:00 -
[44] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:Push your brains a bit further down the road. Whip a spine from somewhere, post with your main, and take the lash like anyone else. Gimp. - |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2149
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 22:57:00 -
[45] - Quote
Rhes wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. So they should keep doing exactly what they have been doing since the Summer of Rage? Please stop calling it that, it makes you sound like a little nerd kid.... Summer of Nerd is preferable.
masternerdguy wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. Expansions should build on previous mechanics not completely rewrite them.
We started the game in 2003 with torpedo's that shot out to 100km or so and today we should still have torpedo's that shoot to 100k or so.
Same goes for the all the random, annoying and sometimes ridiculous changes that occur. Build on it, don't rebuild it constantly. Are you kidding? Back in my day, the Raven could 1 shot any frigate with torps from 80km+! That same raven could hit 2.5km/s! They've certainly changed that! And the only ships that shoot torps anywhere near those ranges get huge bonuses to missile velocity and flight time. Maybe you can do it in a Golem, but certainly not in a raven. Stealth bombers have great torp range, but that is because they used to fire cruise missiles (for their improved range) and when CCP rebalanced them to fire torps, which do more damage, they wanted to maintain the long range property. Put torps on any non bonused ship and they're unlikely to go anywhere near 100km. And they certainly don't annihilate frigates in 1 salvo anymore. You missed the whole point. They should still shoot to 100k because they did when the game was implemented. Like I said you build on the game, you don't rewrite it.
Torps were long range high damage missiles, but they were slow, if a frig was stupid enough to allow itself to get popped by one then it was doing stuff wrong.
Building on the torp thing would have been implementing sig and speed tanking which they did which of course would have resulted in torps no longer instapopping. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
614
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:05:00 -
[46] - Quote
You'v got red on you. Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼a«£¦¬¦P¦¬a«£Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼ -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf In Doubt....Do....Excessively. Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼a«£¦¬¦P¦¬a«£Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼
|
Marsha Mallow
212
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:05:00 -
[47] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Please stop calling it that, it makes you sound like a little nerd kid.... Summer of Nerd is preferable. You are correct. Should be renamed to "Summer of Backhand", NOW STFU RPING PERVES - we can be perverted anywhere *whipcrack* "
Off you run now, I've got bandages for those wounds. No, no, scared ? Ok, limp on - can you please scream a bit louder next time, tah xxxx - |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:13:00 -
[48] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Rhes wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. So they should keep doing exactly what they have been doing since the Summer of Rage? Please stop calling it that, it makes you sound like a little nerd kid.... Summer of Nerd is preferable. masternerdguy wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:What really needs to happen is they need to set goals and then stick to those goals. Expansions should build on previous mechanics not completely rewrite them.
We started the game in 2003 with torpedo's that shot out to 100km or so and today we should still have torpedo's that shoot to 100k or so.
Same goes for the all the random, annoying and sometimes ridiculous changes that occur. Build on it, don't rebuild it constantly. Are you kidding? Back in my day, the Raven could 1 shot any frigate with torps from 80km+! That same raven could hit 2.5km/s! They've certainly changed that! And the only ships that shoot torps anywhere near those ranges get huge bonuses to missile velocity and flight time. Maybe you can do it in a Golem, but certainly not in a raven. Stealth bombers have great torp range, but that is because they used to fire cruise missiles (for their improved range) and when CCP rebalanced them to fire torps, which do more damage, they wanted to maintain the long range property. Put torps on any non bonused ship and they're unlikely to go anywhere near 100km. And they certainly don't annihilate frigates in 1 salvo anymore. You missed the whole point. They should still shoot to 100k because they did when the game was implemented. Like I said you build on the game, you don't rewrite it. Torps were long range high damage missiles, but they were slow, if a frig was stupid enough to allow itself to get popped by one then it was doing stuff wrong. Building on the torp thing would have been implementing sig and speed tanking which they did which of course would have resulted in torps no longer instapopping.
The same argument can be made for other mechanics too. For example, you used to be able to send an area of effect doomsday via a cyno kestrel. Building on this game mechanic could have given some frigs a bonus to doomsday damage via cyno
The main reason for nerfing torps was they stepped on the toes of cruise missiles. This is similar to how rarely HAMS were used instead of Heavies before the rebalance to those missiles.
Finally, long range high DPS weapons are unbalanced, even if they are realistic.
I'm not against adjusting stats of weapons to keep things new and balanced, I am against trying to arbitrarily limit emergent gameplay to satisfy the people who are not intelligent, creative, or social enough to participate. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
283
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:13:00 -
[49] - Quote
Marsha Mallow wrote:Muestereate wrote:Push your brains a bit further down the road. Whip a spine from somewhere, post with your main, and take the lash like anyone else. Gimp.
Is that gimp reference a personal attack? |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:17:00 -
[50] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:Marsha Mallow wrote:Muestereate wrote:Push your brains a bit further down the road. Whip a spine from somewhere, post with your main, and take the lash like anyone else. Gimp. Is that gimp reference a personal attack?
Probably just a reference to the well known, high quality, open source raster graphics application. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
|
Marsha Mallow
212
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:20:00 -
[51] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:Is that gimp reference a personal attack? Compliment. Continue! - |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
283
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:20:00 -
[52] - Quote
Ahh yes of course :) |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2149
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:22:00 -
[53] - Quote
masternerdguy wrote:The same argument can be made for other mechanics too. For example, you used to be able to send an area of effect doomsday via a cyno kestrel. Building on this game mechanic could have given some frigs a bonus to doomsday damage via cyno The main reason for nerfing torps was they stepped on the toes of cruise missiles. This is similar to how rarely HAMS were used instead of Heavies before the rebalance to those missiles. Finally, long range high DPS weapons are unbalanced, even if they are realistic. I'm not against adjusting stats of weapons to keep things new and balanced, I am against trying to arbitrarily limit emergent gameplay to satisfy the people who are not intelligent, creative, or social enough to participate. The cyno doomsday is a little different to a years old functioning weapons system.
Also they didn't step on the toes of cruise missiles, cruise are very fast, have twice the range, are easier to fit and do more damage to smaller ships. Range is irrelevant given they're totally different weapons systems.
Torps were arbitrarily nerfed to have almost as poor range as rockets for no reason other than blasters were short range high dps therefore all high damage dps weapons must be now short range. Irrespective of blasters and all other weapons being instant while torps took a long time to hit and could be out run easily.
Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
masternerdguy
State Protectorate Caldari State
1557
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:25:00 -
[54] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:masternerdguy wrote:The same argument can be made for other mechanics too. For example, you used to be able to send an area of effect doomsday via a cyno kestrel. Building on this game mechanic could have given some frigs a bonus to doomsday damage via cyno The main reason for nerfing torps was they stepped on the toes of cruise missiles. This is similar to how rarely HAMS were used instead of Heavies before the rebalance to those missiles. Finally, long range high DPS weapons are unbalanced, even if they are realistic. I'm not against adjusting stats of weapons to keep things new and balanced, I am against trying to arbitrarily limit emergent gameplay to satisfy the people who are not intelligent, creative, or social enough to participate. The cyno doomsday is a little different to a years old functioning weapons system. Also they didn't step on the toes of cruise missiles, cruise are very fast, have twice the range, are easier to fit and do more damage to smaller ships. Range is irrelevant given they're totally different weapons systems. Torps were arbitrarily nerfed to have almost as poor range as rockets for no reason other than blasters were short range high dps therefore all high damage dps weapons must be now short range. Irrespective of blasters and all other weapons being instant while torps took a long time to hit and could be out run easily.
The balance in this game is that closer range weapons do more damage and longer range weapons do less damage but project damage better. This is good balance, even if it is unrealistic.
Believe me, I'd love to have the old torps back. But they were overpowered. Personally, I think blasters are currently the most OP weapon system, but blaster fans continue to deny this. Things are only impossible until they are not. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20547
|
Posted - 2014.04.08 23:53:00 -
[55] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:Eliminate this ability by tweaking the max amount of the same ship to the number in a fleets wing (50). This would force no more than 50 of the same ship in each fleet. when carried into the logical conclusion of blob balancing. Each fleet would end up with 5 ship types. As a card-carrying member and representative of the 16M-Leaderhsip-SP cabal, I approve of this very silly and completely ineffectual change.
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:It is not some dark conspiracy. It is pretty straightforward. GǪit is also completely devoid of any connection to reality or facts or logic or reasoning. It assumes a secret plan towards some strange goal, neither of which have any support in what actually goes on in the game. That's why it's just a pretty silly conspiracy theory.
Quote:As for T3's being over-powered, that is silly. Always has been. They have never been OP. GǪaside from the very get-go, and aside from how they were intended to work. For a long time, they obsoleted numerous ships that they had no business even being near, for no particular reason other than GÇ£omg, we must make people want themGÇ¥. They were destined for a proper rebalance from the second they were released because they fundamentally failed to live up to their purpose. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
2149
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 00:23:00 -
[56] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Muestereate wrote:Eliminate this ability by tweaking the max amount of the same ship to the number in a fleets wing (50). This would force no more than 50 of the same ship in each fleet. when carried into the logical conclusion of blob balancing. Each fleet would end up with 5 ship types. As a card-carrying member and representative of the 16M-Leaderhsip-SP cabal, I approve of this very silly and completely ineffectual change. Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:It is not some dark conspiracy. It is pretty straightforward. GǪit is also completely devoid of any connection to reality or facts or logic or reasoning. It assumes a secret plan towards some strange goal, neither of which have any support in what actually goes on in the game. That's why it's just a pretty silly conspiracy theory. Quote:As for T3's being over-powered, that is silly. Always has been. They have never been OP. GǪaside from the very get-go, and aside from how they were intended to work. For a long time, they obsoleted numerous ships that they had no business even being near, for no particular reason other than GÇ£omg, we must make people want themGÇ¥. They were destined for a proper rebalance from the second they were released because they fundamentally failed to live up to their purpose. It's arguable now that T3s don't need a major rebalance in terms of obsoleting other ships. From what I see they're pretty rare these days in PvP. I haven't used one in months because there are better cheaper options that don't cost skill points. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
552
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 00:34:00 -
[57] - Quote
The real issue is this following cycle:
1. Update a ship or release new ship that is marginally (say 5%) better at a particular job like mishing or bluesec blobbing or tournaments
2. Because basically EVE is a spreadsheet game and 5% is enough to matter, the updated/new ship becomes a ship of choice and everyone spends a few months training relevant skills
3. Eventually the new ship begins to dominate PvE or fleet doctrines or whatever and forum trolls begin to complain it is OP.
4. CCP then nerf the ship to the point of being useless. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
4539
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 00:36:00 -
[58] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:The real issue is this following cycle:
1. Update a ship or release new ship that is marginally (say 5%) better at a particular job like mishing or bluesec blobbing or tournaments
2. Because basically EVE is a spreadsheet game and 5% is enough to matter, the updated/new ship becomes a ship of choice and everyone spends a few months training relevant skills
3. Eventually the new ship begins to dominate PvE or fleet doctrines or whatever and forum trolls begin to complain it is OP.
4. CCP then nerf the ship to the point of being useless.
You forgot step 5.
"5. And then they nerf Caldari again too." "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
-áPsychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
17716
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 00:42:00 -
[59] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:"5. And then they nerf Caldari again too." Caldari is too Stronk!
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University Minmatar Republic
552
|
Posted - 2014.04.09 00:50:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Hasikan Miallok wrote:The real issue is this following cycle:
1. Update a ship or release new ship that is marginally (say 5%) better at a particular job like mishing or bluesec blobbing or tournaments
2. Because basically EVE is a spreadsheet game and 5% is enough to matter, the updated/new ship becomes a ship of choice and everyone spends a few months training relevant skills
3. Eventually the new ship begins to dominate PvE or fleet doctrines or whatever and forum trolls begin to complain it is OP.
4. CCP then nerf the ship to the point of being useless. You forgot step 5. "5. And then they nerf Caldari again too."
Same basic fallacy ... the idea that popular = OP
In the case of Caldari: 1. potential new players read ancient EVE help guides claiming Caldari are the optimal race and all go Caldari. 2. Hence Drakes and Caracals and Ravens are disproportionally popular. 3. Popular means OP 4. Hence Caldari ships are OP and need a nerf. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |