|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
36
   |
Posted - 2011.11.22 14:08:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yay! I'm glad the 200m I spent on skills and nearly as much again in drugs isn't soon to be worthless with these changes.
CCP ruins another part of their game, no there is no reason to use anything other than strong with no side effects and also because who is going to even bother injecting less than strong. An improved X-instinct will only give a 5.5% sig radius reduction, that'll hardly sway a fight...
Seriously CCP the current system is so much better than this. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
37
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 14:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Hey folks, it seems this thread needs some attention.
-snip-
Note: Alchemist and Edge implant sets are an oversight that are being looked into. Fix will most likely not make it for Crucible release, but shortly after, so we advise you to hold on to them.
Hope that helps.
OK first off, thank you for replying, even on a topic like this we still like that you make the effort to communicate with us.
....but What are you thinking?! you seem to basically be moving to change boosters as a get-out of having to make big changes to the broken aspects of that area of the game.
The fact you completely forgot about Alchemist and Edge implant sets makes me think this is yet another rushed solution.
FIX Issue this customs agents
FIX Issues with drug acquisition (gas harvesting)
FIX Smuggling penalties and the profession as a whole
Leave the booster mechanics alone they are the one thing with that whole messed up system that actually work as intended!
You want to make them so everyone is forced to stick in a pair of strongs before a fight or be at a disadvantage. In reality they should be a last ditch and you should have to decide whether to use a strong /improved/ standard based on side effects AND price!
Yes boosters could have done with some changes to make them more widely used Gas + manufacture changes and smuggling changes, but the pills themselves were pretty balanced I'd say.
CCP leave drugs alone and fix the black market. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 15:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: Unpredictability: that is due to the side-effects being randomly applied when you consume a booster, and that often hampers the very points you are trying to boost. As examples, chance of reducing shield capacity when consuming Blue Pills, missile velocity with Crash, or armor hitpoint / capacitor penalty with Exile. The list goes on, but the important point to remember here is that unpredictable mechanics on a player produced, controlled item do little to promote the usefulness of it in the long run.
Booster side-effects, as they are currently, are unpredictable, sure. Sometimes those side effect penalties contradict the positive effect of using the booster in the first place. Agreed. And some people don't like that. Fine. But is any of that a reason to completely remove all side effects from all boosters? No, it is not. What it does justify is the simplification of side effects. Reduce the number of possible side effects, and remove the contradictions between boost and penalty. Boosters are broadly split into two categories: defence (slot 1, covering shield and armour tanking, capacitor and sig radius) and offence (slots 2 and 3, covering turret and missile range and accuracy). Therefore, removing the contradictions is as simple as removing offensive penalties from offensive boosters, and removing defensive penalties from defensive boosters. So, for Blue Pill, remove the penalties to shield capacity and capacitor capacity, and leave the penalties to turrets and missiles. For X-Instinct, remove the penalties to armour and shield, but leave falloff and missile velocity. For Drop, remove the contradictory penalty to turret falloff. And so on. You could even scale the unpredictability of booster side effects with their strength. So Standard boosters could have one or two possible side effects, Improved could have two or three, and Strong could have three of four. Perhaps higher strength boosters should still have a chance to cause a side effect that might interfere with the intended effect. Ytterbium, if uncertainty is the problem, deal with the uncertainty itself. Don't completely castrate boosters. Just simplify the side effects and don't nerf the 'boost' of boosters.
Even if they change the penalties to different things they are basically removing them.
There is no risk to a triage carrier injecting exile if the only side-effects are missile flight time, tracking and invention success!
Keep side effects how they are (mostly) even in a worst case scenario and you get a cap and armor/shield capacity side-effect you are still better off as chances are you are cap boosting and your buffer matters very little BUT they are still harsh enough to make everyone use them all the time and they stop capital pilots using without reason. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
41
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 16:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
SO I HEARD U WANNA CHANGE SIDE EFFECTS?
Side effects are essential to moderate the use of boosters and stop them becoming the next SWG doctor buff or potion. They are also essential to keep balance between the different tiers of boosters.
Side effects must have a meaningful impact to achieve this, that said it shouldn't be so bad that it makes them not worth using or completely mitigates their bonus. The following changes are all I think are needed to balance the drugs themselves
Blue Pill
This drug is fine.
The hitpoints / cap side effect is enough to not make injecting a light-hearted decision, but even in a worst case scenario the drug is typically beneficial.
Crash
I would consider swapping the Velocity penalty for something else. Chances are your target is moving quickly so should you be.
Otherwise fine.
Drop
I would consider swapping the Velocity penalty for something else. Chances are your target is moving quickly so should you be
otherwise fine.
Exile
This drug is fine.
The hitpoints / cap side effect is enough to not make injecting a light-hearted decision, but even in a worst case scenario the drug is typically beneficial.
Frentix
I would consider swapping the Velocity penalty for something else. If you are kiting you need speed to maintain distance
The bonus could be slightly increased (25% for strong, 30 seems too much) but I haven't thought of the full impact of this so I'm not sure.
Mindflood
I don't have huge experience here but from what I hear it seems fine.
Sooth Sayer
Velocity penalty probably needs changing (who risks a 30% speed loss for 20% tracking?)
I think the strength needs to be upped to 30% for strong and effective changes made improved / standard. Probably the least used of the drugs.
X-Instinct
Strength probably needs increasing I really like the idea of this drug but its not often I think 'Oh crap if only I had 7.5% less signature (standard) I might have won that fight!'
I'd like to see 20-25% for the strong and possibly 10 and 15-17.5 for standard and improved respectively.
Side effects are fine
I'd also like to see the slot 2 boosters end up 25-50% cheaper (though manufacturing changes) than the slot 1 boosters to help increase use.
|
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.22 20:57:00 -
[5] - Quote
Daedalus Arcova wrote:Whatever the specifics are, a side effect that hurts armour amount on an armour tanking booster is a Bad Thing, but side effects (that are still meaningful) in general are a Good Thing.
I think it balances them just fine, but he I wouldn't complain if there is a boost to them, either way these changes make exile far worse than it is even with the penalty. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
42
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 12:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
No. You are not Cribba.
I agree with you that price changes are not a reason to cancel a patch but...
Cailais wrote:Even if the argument that they will become 'mandatory' for effective PVP is a false argument as that just reflects back upon the value of the resources and production chain. The only group in this case who can argue are those that can't get them, or cant afford them: which just means they need to try harder.
However here you just come off as a stupid. I'm not rich (<20bn) but I (like many) can quite comfortably afford to pop boosters and yes this change might generally make the game easier for me and others like me but that does not make it good. You are openly advocating removal of another part of eve that actually requires some brainpower and replacing it with whoever has the bigger wallet (RL or ingame) gets the advantage. Hope can you possibly think this is healthy for the game?
At this point lets just go the whole hog and we'll just have 10 different ships which you pay ISK to upgrade between level 1 and 80. Then pay some more ISK for some potions to give you +10% on some stats for 2 hours. Pay 1000 AUR and you can revive where you died for no penalty....
I agree with CCP that many things in this game were needlessly complicated (agents etc..) but boosters are just dumbing the game down. CCP this isn't going to get you 5 million of WoW's subscribers, its just going to lose you subscribers who want to play REAL eve. |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 14:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
AkiRoss wrote:Today on SISI isn't that the same ? The only difference is the result, not the initial question. With Side-Effects you have the risk to waste your money. People won't waste 30M ISK if they don't need to. Not everyone play with a Slave, not everyone can spend 30M every day (yes, this is 1h farming for most people).
No it different on both SISI and TQ the side effects mean their use isn't certain, people don't want to lose 20% velocity or armour or cap.
I dont pop and exile the second I get in a myrm/domi/cap I wait until its use is absolutely necessary, under the new system you may as well before the fight. This will lead to highsec bears popping pills from the safety of stations for a static buff.
1 hour farming? What are they doing?
AkiRoss wrote:I am sorry but 95% of EvE Players not using Boosters are really happy with this change. While I don't really like side-effects, I love the idea of having addictions mechanics later on.
Great you don't like side effects that last about an hour but you wont mind long term addictions?
AkiRoss wrote:Anyway, I hope this modification will hit TQ next week ;)
When you say that everyone reads
AkiRoss wrote:I am a scrub who finds current gameplay too challenging, please make it easier so I can just shell out some ISK for an advantage |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 17:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Thank you very much!
You do not have to apologise for speculation, that is all it is 'speculation' people should know the risks.
/prays my last 70 exile sell quickly  |
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69
43
|
Posted - 2011.11.23 22:24:00 -
[9] - Quote
Somal Thunder wrote:Suddenly nobody will fly Gallente, making minmatar EVEN MORE SUPREME.
Looking forward to ganking triple rep hypes/myrms/dual rep brutixes in a hurricane scratch that, rupture.
Quoted for posting the next time RVB pretend to have decent PVPers |
|
|
| |
|