EVE Search - CCP making a mistake?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP making a mistake?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.11 23:47:00 - [1] Edited by: Saeris Tal''Urduar on 11/08/2006 23:47:18 I'll try and make this straight to the point. Is CCP forcing PvP into the realm of the elitists? I think so, and I dont think CCP realize it. Everyone knows what happens when a frigate meets an assault frigate or for that matter an interceptor. And its just magnified when when a cruiser meets a HAC. Tech 2 is that much more effictive and we all know it. Now they are introducing combat boosters, very expensive and the components are only found in 0.0 ahem multiple 0.0 regions. We all know they are going to be labor intensive to harvest and make. Thus making them usable only by the wealthy, much like HACs in PvP. Okay fair enough, its only right that if they are expensive and time consuming to make, that the producer earns their isk back. Okay what about Invention? I see it only dropping prices of HACs to around 40M-60M, although I feel 20m is more a reasonable price. Now Rigs. And this is where I think CCP has gotten it wrong..very wrong. They are going to be defensive or mostly so. Yes thats a great idea. (oh and CCP they dont have to be all combat related even if defensive...dont forget about our traders and miners and haulers) Originally by: SoniClover It goes without saying (but IÆm still saying it) that all Rigs have a Calibration need attribute on them. Tech II Rigs have higher Calibration need, but then again tech II ships have higher Calibration. No!! This is where you are getting it wrong, this is where you are once again making it *just* for the elitist wealthy!! You are widening the gap between the T1 causual PvP'r to make it near impossible for them to compete against the T2 flying, combat boosted, 5 billion implanted, T2 rigged, T2 ammo'd opponent. Rigs should be the item that brings things closer to being balanced...Hmmm, maybe balanced is the wrong word. Rigs should be the item that makes combat between the very rich and the not-so a little more fair. T1 ships should have the higher Calibration and fitting slots NOT T2, as in the T1 ships will be able to fit more rigs and more of the T2 versions. I'm not talking about making T1 equal to T2 with rigs, but making them more in line. T1 ships should not be throw away ships when it comes to combat, because thats what they are. T2 ships are already highly defensiable..why make it more so when compaired to T1. I dont think I have to list all the advantages of making T1 once again a good ship to fly..with T2 or even T1 rigs. (okay I list one advantage; it will restimulate the T1 ship market) But it shouldnt be done (as CCP stated it) just for the disadvantages it will cause. I dont what to make say a T1 cruiser compariable to a T2, that would just be wrong. Here let me try to explaine it how I see it happening. Lets say a cruiser has a rating of 5 then the HAC would have a rating of 12. If they make T2 rigs really only usable by T2 ships I see this happening. Cruiser rating of 7, Hac rating of 18. If they do it like I say, I see it more like this. Cruiser rating of 9, Hac rating of 14. Definitely not balanced, but then again not blown out of proportion CCP unbalanced. You mark my words, if CCP goes ahead with what they plan, in six months to a year noobies will be complaining they dont have the isk to compete with the older players. CPPs great forethought with the skill system that allows a noobie to compete after 3-6 months will all be for not. EVE will turn into a game that isnt worth the time for new players to invest in. Okay I even think thats a little far-fetched and apocalyptical, but I do think that the isk issue for new players will be a problem and one that will have merit. Plus I dont want CCP to spend the next 6-8 months trying to bring comabt back into balance, when they have the chance to do it now with rigs.
Scrofalitic One Total Warehouse Logistics Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.08.11 23:50:00 - [2] HACs at 40 - 60 mill? I think I just messed myself. That would be superb! CCP seem to have it right imo.
Norma Stitz	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:02:00 - [3] Get a t1 frig and go out to kill and die. Then do it again.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:06:00 - [4] 20m worth of cruisers can beat 500m worth of HACs. Sounds balanced to me . --[23] Member-- Originally by: DB Preacher The only time BoB's backs are to the wall is when Backdoor Bandit is in local.
Xenuchrist Gallente STK Scientific Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:07:00 - [5] Edited by: Xenuchrist on 12/08/2006 00:11:19 Hmmm... this could actually be justefied by ship technology: If one look at the T2 ships as (extreme) pre-rigged/rized versions of their T1 counterparts, then they shouldn't have as much rigging/rizing(sp?) potential left as the T1s... Rigged T1 ships shouldn't get near T2's though. -At most closing one third of the gap. "In human stupidity, when it is not malicious, there is something very touching, even beautiful... There always is." /Tolstoy
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:22:00 - [6] Originally by: Xenuchrist Edited by: Xenuchrist on 12/08/2006 00:11:19 Hmmm... this could actually be justefied by ship technology: If one look at the T2 ships as (extreme) pre-rigged/rized versions of their T1 counterparts, then they shouldn't have as much rigging/rizing(sp?) potential left as the T1s... Rigged T1 ships shouldn't get near T2's though. -At most closing one third of the gap. Thats my point. Closing the gap not equalizing it. Not really sure what point DS is trying to make though. I've seen gangs of indies beat HACs too, but what has that got to do with anything?
Galk Gallente Autumn Tactics	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:31:00 - [7] Originally by: Dark Shikari 20m worth of cruisers can beat 500m worth of HACs. Sounds balanced to me . He's right There's no win in eve, reguardless of what you fly, 40 million or 4 million, your just as f)))))) if you're numbers up. Per your op id say it's not intentional, but probaly does happen on short scale. ______ Long ago one gorgeous night, we let the stars grow free. We let Zhuge do that once, he came back carrying a traffic cone, a forsale sign and three empty bottles of dutch lager. He also lost his Zimmer Frame... - Imaran
Joerd Toastius Octavian Vanguard	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:32:00 - [8] Originally by: Dark Shikari 20m worth of cruisers can beat 500m worth of HACs. Sounds balanced to me . 200k of frigate can kill 2bn of dreadnaught if you set things up right. What's your point? :P
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:32:00 - [9] Uhm, could you explain to me why... A player who plays maybe six hours a week should have the same chance in combat as somebody that spends a lot of time working for T2. I think the T2 player who spends his time working for his isk should have the advantage. Oh, and a BC will rip that HAC a new one. I don't see what the issue is to be honest. The day somebody with limited skill and little money can compete 1 vs 1 with somebody who spends quite a bit of time making isk and training for T2 is the day I quit. My Guides
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:37:00 - [10] Originally by: Joerd Toastius Originally by: Dark Shikari 20m worth of cruisers can beat 500m worth of HACs. Sounds balanced to me . 200k of frigate can kill 2bn of dreadnaught if you set things up right. What's your point? :P Meh, more like 10m worth of frigate . But my basic comment is that if you can't beat a HAC, get a friend. If EVE had situations in which you were only allowed to fight 1 on 1, the "imbalance" of HACs might make more sense. --[23] Member-- Originally by: DB Preacher The only time BoB's backs are to the wall is when Backdoor Bandit is in local.
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:37:00 - [11] Originally by: Galk Originally by: Dark Shikari 20m worth of cruisers can beat 500m worth of HACs. Sounds balanced to me . He's right There's no win in eve, reguardless of what you fly, 40 million or 4 million, your just as f)))))) if you're numbers up. Per your op id say it's not intentional, but probaly does happen on short scale. No he not, and he making a stupid point. A person should not have to round up 3-5 people to beat 1 person, and with the way CCP wants to implement rigs they'll have to round up 5-9.
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:41:00 - [12] Originally by: Aeaus Uhm, could you explain to me why... A player who plays maybe six hours a week should have the same chance in combat as somebody that spends a lot of time working for T2. I think the T2 player who spends his time working for his isk should have the advantage. Oh, and a BC will rip that HAC a new one. I don't see what the issue is to be honest. The day somebody with limited skill and little money can compete 1 vs 1 with somebody who spends quite a bit of time making isk and training for T2 is the day I quit. I never said "same chance", and as a matter of fact I said several times in my original post it shouldnt be that way. Originally by: Aeaus Oh, and a BC will rip that HAC a new one. I'm glad you belive that, as I sell BC's.
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:45:00 - [13] Originally by: Dark Shikari But my basic comment is that if you can't beat a HAC, get a friend. If EVE had situations in which you were only allowed to fight 1 on 1, the "imbalance" of HACs might make more sense. I have no problem with that imbalance, as it is now. And I never once said HAC or T2 anything should be nerfed. My worry is, Rigs as how CCP want to implement them will blow things way out of proportion.
Drokar Gazer Two Brothers Mining Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.12 00:48:00 - [14] Originally by: Saeris Tal'Urduar Edited by: Saeris Tal''Urduar on 12/08/2006 00:34:11 Originally by: Xenuchrist Edited by: Xenuchrist on 12/08/2006 00:11:19 Hmmm... this could actually be justefied by ship technology: If one look at the T2 ships as (extreme) pre-rigged/rized versions of their T1 counterparts, then they shouldn't have as much rigging/rizing(sp?) potential left as the T1s... Rigged T1 ships shouldn't get near T2's though. -At most closing one third of the gap. Thats my point. Closing the gap not equalizing it. Not really sure what point DS is trying to make though. I've seen gangs of indies beat HACs too, but what has that got to do with anything? edit:Which Xenu is why I included this example. Quote: Lets say a cruiser has a rating of 5 then the HAC would have a rating of 12. If they make T2 rigs really only usable by T2 ships I see this happening. Cruiser rating of 7, Hac rating of 18. If they do it like I say, I see it more like this. Cruiser rating of 9, Hac rating of 14. Definitely not balanced, but then again not blown out of proportion CCP unbalanced. The point I'm trying to make is what chance will a noob or almost noob ever have to compete with the meta fitted veteran, as it is almost zero, but as it will be less than zero. And I see that as bad for the game. And I see rigs as the chance to fix that or break it even worse. TBH, you are not supposed to be on the same level as a noob. Think about it, are u saying that in WoW for example a lvl 10 should be on par with a lvl 60? That just doesnt make sense. And if Hac's are 60m which they wont be, then most everyone would have one, then it kinda makes useless t1, now doesnt it. If you are new to the game, then you are new. Get over it. This is a long term game. There are no levels. It is a strategy based game for the most part on hardcore mode (compared to other mmorpgs). This is the nature of eve and why it appeals to us. This is why we are not playing WoW. What other game can u spend a year training and only scratch the surface of your potential? NONE. If you cannot afford t2, then you are not ready for it. Simple as that. And dont think t1 is so unimportant because it is not. T1 is the mainstay and will stay that way. T2 is a bonus for working hard to afford the luxuries. _________________________________________ Drokar Gazer Two Brothers Mining Corp. [TBMC]
Sorja E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:10:00 - [15] HACs and other fancy nber expensive stuff should come down on earth with Kali. I used to pay my Eagles and Cerberus 60mill, which already was a nice 23mill profit for the manufacturer, those times will come back with 'Invention' or whatever it's called. Now, on the game design topic, I think CCP made the common mistake of inexperimented P&P game masters: give bigger stuff to your players to keep them interested. That's the 'not so imaginative way' and has indeed unbalanced the game. I think there was no need for such an incredible gap between tech I and II ships. But hey, it's not that bad, newbies are cannon fodder and the grind is somewhat awfull for skills, but since you can buy characters... ____________________ Darko1107 > does anything in ascn space have tech II fittings? Quillan Rage > Iron ships
Gungankllr Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:13:00 - [16] I have 30 million SP, most all in combat. I get killed all the time. You can train to be a rather good interceptor or HAC pilot in a few months. Somebody will always have an advantage over somebody else. Either in skills, ship, ship loadout, range, speed... you name it. It's the variable of the battle that makes eve fun. Although I pretty much know what a Vagabond is going to fit 95% of the time. Hint: It starts and ends with s. Hidden in this signature is a secret message. I like pie.
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:13:00 - [17] Originally by: Drokar Gazer Originally by: Saeris Tal'Urduar Edited by: Saeris Tal''Urduar on 12/08/2006 00:34:11 Originally by: Xenuchrist Edited by: Xenuchrist on 12/08/2006 00:11:19 Hmmm... this could actually be justefied by ship technology: If one look at the T2 ships as (extreme) pre-rigged/rized versions of their T1 counterparts, then they shouldn't have as much rigging/rizing(sp?) potential left as the T1s... Rigged T1 ships shouldn't get near T2's though. -At most closing one third of the gap. Thats my point. Closing the gap not equalizing it. Not really sure what point DS is trying to make though. I've seen gangs of indies beat HACs too, but what has that got to do with anything? edit:Which Xenu is why I included this example. Quote: Lets say a cruiser has a rating of 5 then the HAC would have a rating of 12. If they make T2 rigs really only usable by T2 ships I see this happening. Cruiser rating of 7, Hac rating of 18. If they do it like I say, I see it more like this. Cruiser rating of 9, Hac rating of 14. Definitely not balanced, but then again not blown out of proportion CCP unbalanced. The point I'm trying to make is what chance will a noob or almost noob ever have to compete with the meta fitted veteran, as it is almost zero, but as it will be less than zero. And I see that as bad for the game. And I see rigs as the chance to fix that or break it even worse. TBH, you are not supposed to be on the same level as a noob. Think about it, are u saying that in WoW for example a lvl 10 should be on par with a lvl 60? That just doesnt make sense. And if Hac's are 60m which they wont be, then most everyone would have one, then it kinda makes useless t1, now doesnt it. If you are new to the game, then you are new. Get over it. This is a long term game. There are no levels. It is a strategy based game for the most part on hardcore mode (compared to other mmorpgs). This is the nature of eve and why it appeals to us. This is why we are not playing WoW. What other game can u spend a year training and only scratch the surface of your potential? NONE. If you cannot afford t2, then you are not ready for it. Simple as that. And dont think t1 is so unimportant because it is not. T1 is the mainstay and will stay that way. T2 is a bonus for working hard to afford the luxuries. I'm not a noob, but thats who I'm worried for. And you example of a level 10 WOW player to a level 60, just goes to show your ignorance of this game. EVE does allow a "lvl-10" to be competitive to a "lvl-60" its why EVE skills are designed the way it is, its one of the major examples of the "golden light" forethoughs of the EVE devs. But what I'm worried about is EVE will, more than it is now, turn into an isk grinding game to be competitive in PvP. If you're an noob to the game and you want to PvP you shouldnt have to grind away for 300m isk to get a HACand be able play that part of the game. And yes anyone can jump into a T1 ship and get blown up, I'm talking about when that person gets bored of being out classed, thats when they'll have to grind for isk. And thats when EVE will start to lose people to attrition from grinding. Thats why I think CCP is making a mistake with Rigs, and why I think they have a chance to stop a bad thing before it happens.
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:23:00 - [18] Originally by: Gungankllr Edited by: Gungankllr on 12/08/2006 01:15:47 I have 30 million SP, most all in combat. I get killed all the time. You can train to be a rather good interceptor or HAC pilot in a few months. Somebody will always have an advantage over somebody else. Either in skills, ship, ship loadout, range, speed... you name it. It's the variable of the battle that makes eve fun. Although I pretty much know what a Vagabond is going to fit 95% of the time. Hint: It starts and ends with s. Oh, and for 100 mill you can get 20 friends cruisers and go for a spin. Find me a HAC that can kill 20 cruisers and I'll buy you lunch. Well, I reckon an Eagle could snipe them, as could a Cerberus. And a Vagabond could stab them to death. And a Muinin could sit there and ugly them to death. Gungankllr, I've gotten pulled into arguments about numbers...okay its not about numbers, its about balance..or more so unbalance. I dont want the PvP part of the game to just be for the very wealthy, it shouldnt be all about (as an example) HACs. T1 ships should be viable and not just in gangs of 10+.
WeetBix	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:34:00 - [19] Edited by: WeetBix on 12/08/2006 01:34:46 [edit - bah, typos] I think what the OP is trying to say is that if ccp is not carefull, the only people who will be competitive in pvp are those that grind for t2 parts and uber ships. If you dont have 'purple molten core pvp gear' (to use WoW as an example) then dont bother with pvp; you won't stand a chance. This goes against the current style of 'the smarter player wins, not the best ship' in Eve where everything from the smallest frig to the largest Titan has a role. What I think most of the other posters are saying is that those who put in more play time and hunt for better gear and are uber rich SHOULD have an advantage, otherwise what the point of being uber rich and having a powerfull character in the first place? If I'm reading it correctly, everyone is saying the same thing. I think that character wise, characters should be able to get uber rich and powerfull, but a ship should never be so powerfull it exceeds the purpose it was intended for. I think (maybe) that is what the op is getting at with rigs: They need to serve a purpose, but that purpose is only achivable with lots of grinding. Sorry in advance for any assumptions I got wrong. ----------- "Sorry, I never made such a bet. Every1 knows there are no Titans"" - sollit dude
Reanigael Caldari Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:50:00 - [20] Edited by: Reanigael on 12/08/2006 01:52:28 This is an interesting thread... and it worries me. I'm just one of those thousands of new trial accounts testing Eve out.. Like others, I recently came here because I am tired of two things in the games I find: 1- Your PvP winnings correlate to how much you farm PvE, and 2-Not being able to compete reasonably 1v1 without an expensive twinking setup. I know some players need their cake and to eat it as well... but I came here looking for a fair and fun PvP experience that I could enjoyable participate in after just a few months. The types of changes that favor easy PvP wins for characters with deep pockets unfortunatley are very unattractive for new players, and therefore ultimatley the health of the game. Until now, I was really interested in EvE as the solution to looking for a decent PvP game that wasnt based around some uber twinked characters in ultra equipment I didnt stand a chance against. I guess I am saddened to see that CCP is moving in this direction, because I was so excited. Sounds like its just gonna become just another shmuck game where the rich clean house on the poor, and since you lose your ship, you better get used to either getting more poor than before, or farming PvE in order to PvP. No thanks to both, that's not what I came here looking for. - - - - -I have so much to learn, please take the time to help me and explain it well.. =)
Lazuran	Posted - 2006.08.12 01:59:00 - [21] That's ok. CCP wants to make their most profitable customers happy: people with 10 accounts who haven't seen the sunlight in 6 months and people who buy timecodes for billions of ISK every month so they can afford all the faction/T2 stuff. The non-addicts leave sooner or later because of the annoying bugs anyway :)
WeetBix	Posted - 2006.08.12 02:01:00 - [22] Reanigael: Try to stay away from the forums if you are learning the game. Seriously, 99% of the stuff that goes on here is nowhere near as bad as it sounds The pvp in this game is by far the best out there and I think you will have fun with this game. CCP have, in my opinion, done a great job in giving us a game we all enjoy and I think they will continue to do that. I don't think pvp is going to turn into a WoW purple-gear-slap-fest any time soon without an explosion or two on the forums, so the fact alone that there are so many people who feel strongly about how the game should be helps steer it in the right direction. So don't let the forums put you off, otherwise Eve just sounds like a lag-ridden game with constant server crashes and totally unbalanced gear when really its doing quite well (otherwise none of us would play it ). Play the game, make up your own mind, and don't worry about what it going to happen 5 years from now. Heck, in 5 years from now Eve could be the #1 game in the world! ----------- "Sorry, I never made such a bet. Every1 knows there are no Titans"" - sollit dude
Arkanor Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2006.08.12 02:16:00 - [23] The 20m HAC idea made me lol. Originally by: Ghosthowl WoW = hardcore paladins smashin dat face. Originally by: HippoKing I just cried, you know that?
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 15:44:00 - [24] Originally by: WeetBix Edited by: WeetBix on 12/08/2006 01:34:46 [edit - bah, typos] I think what the OP is trying to say is that if ccp is not carefull, the only people who will be competitive in pvp are those that grind for t2 parts and uber ships. If you dont have 'purple molten core pvp gear' (to use WoW as an example) then dont bother with pvp; you won't stand a chance. This goes against the current style of 'the smarter player wins, not the best ship' in Eve where everything from the smallest frig to the largest Titan has a role. What I think most of the other posters are saying is that those who put in more play time and hunt for better gear and are uber rich SHOULD have an advantage, otherwise what the point of being uber rich and having a powerfull character in the first place? If I'm reading it correctly, everyone is saying the same thing. I think that character wise, characters should be able to get uber rich and powerfull, but a ship should never be so powerfull it exceeds the purpose it was intended for. I think (maybe) that is what the op is getting at with rigs: They need to serve a purpose, but that purpose is only achivable with lots of grinding. Sorry in advance for any assumptions I got wrong. Yes, WeetBix thats more or less what I'm trying to say. And thank you. If the thread readers havent already noticed I'm just a little lystdexic. I try and give examples and that just ends up confusing people even more. Let me try one more time with just two sentences. (I will probably f'it up, but here it goes) Oh and I'm going to use "HAC" in place of "T2 ship". Why make a complete T2 Rig fitting only usable in a HAC? Why not make a complete T2 Rig fitting only usable in a T1 ship, and a mix of T2 and T1 Rig fitting usable in a HAC? Now I'm going to try and explaine the reasoning for me wanting T2 Rigs optimized for T1 ships. Why give yet another* advantage for HAC's, when optimizing Rigs for T1 ships doesnt affect a HACs balance in any way.* And to close. I'm not trying to bring a T1 cruiser up to par with a HAC, I'm just trying to make a T1 cruiser less worthless. Thats really all I'm trying to do. (I just do it badly) And sorry if I hurt anyones brain with them trying to understand anything I wrote.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.12 15:51:00 - [25] The big difference between wow and eve is that you have real loss here. Of course people can bring their pimped out pwnmobiles to combat, but if they encounter a few skilled players, they will go down and lose everything. So basicly, because people lose gear in this game, Im not worried it will turn out the same way WoW has. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Nicoli Voldkif Caelli-Merced	Posted - 2006.08.12 16:09:00 - [26] Originally by: Jim McGregor The big difference between wow and eve is that you have real loss here. Of course people can bring their pimped out pwnmobiles to combat, but if they encounter a few skilled players, they will go down and lose everything. So basicly, because people lose gear in this game, Im not worried it will turn out the same way WoW has. Yes and most people who fly HACs in PVP can afford to lose them or ese they would fly something else. So the introduction rigs more and likely they will be able to afford to replace them. And if you had the option to make you HAC more likely to win so you don't have to replace it by adding a full set of T2 rigs, you think they are going to do it? to put some numbers down on how this should be balanced. Call a T1 cruiser at 1 and a HAC at 2. Rigs should be able to raise a T1 cruiser to about 1.5 and a HAC to about 2.25. HAC should stay better but since they are already the tweaked/overloaded ships they are, you shouldn't be able to get much more out of them.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.12 16:16:00 - [27] Originally by: Nicoli Voldkif Yes and most people who fly HACs in PVP can afford to lose them or ese they would fly something else. So the introduction rigs more and likely they will be able to afford to replace them. And if you had the option to make you HAC more likely to win so you don't have to replace it by adding a full set of T2 rigs, you think they are going to do it? to put some numbers down on how this should be balanced. Call a T1 cruiser at 1 and a HAC at 2. Rigs should be able to raise a T1 cruiser to about 1.5 and a HAC to about 2.25. HAC should stay better but since they are already the tweaked/overloaded ships they are, you shouldn't be able to get much more out of them. Well, if they can afford to lose them, I guess they are working hard on making money then. Good for them. I dont see the problem here. Its not unbalanced that some people have lots of money and some dont. This is not communism. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Powder Monkey	Posted - 2006.08.12 16:19:00 - [28] Originally by: Jim McGregor Originally by: Nicoli Voldkif Yes and most people who fly HACs in PVP can afford to lose them or ese they would fly something else. So the introduction rigs more and likely they will be able to afford to replace them. And if you had the option to make you HAC more likely to win so you don't have to replace it by adding a full set of T2 rigs, you think they are going to do it? to put some numbers down on how this should be balanced. Call a T1 cruiser at 1 and a HAC at 2. Rigs should be able to raise a T1 cruiser to about 1.5 and a HAC to about 2.25. HAC should stay better but since they are already the tweaked/overloaded ships they are, you shouldn't be able to get much more out of them. Well, if they can afford to lose them, I guess they are working hard on making money then. Good for them. I dont see the problem here. Its not unbalanced that some people have lots of money and some dont. This is not communism. china communist party
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.12 16:20:00 - [29] Originally by: Powder Monkey china communist party Spells CCP... OMG H4X. :) --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Nicoli Voldkif Caelli-Merced	Posted - 2006.08.12 16:42:00 - [30] Originally by: Jim McGregor Well, if they can afford to lose them, I guess they are working hard on making money then. Good for them. I dont see the problem here. Its not unbalanced that some people have lots of money and some dont. This is not communism. I agree with you on the current state of balance between T2 and T1 ships. The thing That we are worried about is if T2 ships get the most benefit from rigs will that balance start becoming to where if you can't afford to run a T2 ship you have to be able to outnumber those who do by a rediculous amount. One of EVE's biggest draws to me was that when I want to go PvP I can compete even If I don't have the absolute best gear. I don't want to see EVE become if you don't have a T2 ship with a full T2 mod fit, with T2 implants, and T2 rigs your going to be so disadvantaged that PvP becomes unenjoyable. Thats what turned me off from the WoW, EQ, CoH/CoV style games.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.12 16:54:00 - [31] Originally by: Nicoli Voldkif I agree with you on the current state of balance between T2 and T1 ships. The thing That we are worried about is if T2 ships get the most benefit from rigs will that balance start becoming to where if you can't afford to run a T2 ship you have to be able to outnumber those who do by a rediculous amount. One of EVE's biggest draws to me was that when I want to go PvP I can compete even If I don't have the absolute best gear. I don't want to see EVE become if you don't have a T2 ship with a full T2 mod fit, with T2 implants, and T2 rigs your going to be so disadvantaged that PvP becomes unenjoyable. Thats what turned me off from the WoW, EQ, CoH/CoV style games. Yeah, I dont want that either and I understand that you are worried. But the fact remains that you lose things when you die in this game. Even if you can afford to replace the uber ship and the uber rigs, it will be a significant blow to your wallet if you have a full t2 setup tech 2 cruiser. Most people that fly Vagabonds and buy them off market seems to go back to t1 cruisers after a while since they lose so much money when they die. Then again, some people run missions for a week to replace the ship. I remember back when i played wow that lots of kids had great gear and just ran around killing people because they were bored. But they wouldnt have done that if there would have been a risk of losing their gear and paying 1000g to get it back. Its actually simple to kill most hacs using normal t1 cruisers in this game. Its not like wow where you cant kill a lvl 60 even if you are 10 level 50's. In Eve, you can jam him or tank/avoid the damage long enough to wear him down. People are very focused on skillpoints and ships, when what really matters is teamwork to bring a oldtimer down. Grab a bunch of elite frigates and you will make anyone's day a bad one. :) --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
000Hunter000 Gallente Dummy Inc.	Posted - 2006.08.12 17:39:00 - [32] a cerb for 40 mill? where can i order some? dreams on about hacs for 40 mill Banner will be updated shortly
eLLioTT wave Art of War	Posted - 2006.08.12 17:52:00 - [33] i know pilots that get upset (and its very rare) if they lose their rifter when fighting an interceptor. I'd also put them in any T1 variant vs hac and bet on the t1 version with them flying it ;) Don't think sp and isk are ftw, player skill and tactics are.
Akira Kaneshiro Caldari Associated Press	Posted - 2006.08.12 18:22:00 - [34] TBH I think CCP want this thing happens because.. if you think about the GTC and ISK. If the gap became bigger.. better to CCP because people will buy more and more GTC to trade for ISK to buy t2 ships, chars, etc to try decrease the gap between a noob and veteran player. I dont think the total ammount of players in eve has increased so much in the last months. How many people do you know that has more than 1 account? Why? Because noob player are trying fill that difference as much is possible. How many times I read in others forum the advice: "You will be ready to pvp after 6 months" CCP is very happy with this gap between noob player and veteran.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.12 18:47:00 - [35] Originally by: Akira Kaneshiro TBH I think CCP want this thing happens because.. if you think about the GTC and ISK. If the gap became bigger.. better to CCP because people will buy more and more GTC to trade for ISK to buy t2 ships, chars, etc to try decrease the gap between a noob and veteran player. I dont think the total ammount of players in eve has increased so much in the last months. How many people do you know that has more than 1 account? Why? Because noob player are trying fill that difference as much is possible. How many times I read in others forum the advice: "You will be ready to pvp after 6 months" CCP is very happy with this gap between noob player and veteran. You can pvp after 1 week in a group. Dont blame ccp for not having the guts to try it. I used to take rookies with me to pirate people just to show them how much fun it is. And they loved it. You read alot of crap in these forums...its not 6 months until you can pvp. Its possibly 6 months before you have all learning skills + tech 2 gunnery skills and support skills, but why wait for those to complete before you pvp? You will die anyway if you are a rookie, even with those character skills. Dont believe the hype... just go out there and have fun. 2 newbies can kill a oldtimer easily if you just try it. If you lose, its probably because you dont know the game (oops, his medium drones COULD hit my frigate). Just play around and learn it. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Nicoli Voldkif Caelli-Merced	Posted - 2006.08.12 18:57:00 - [36] Originally by: Akira Kaneshiro How many times I read in others forum the advice: "You will be ready to pvp after 6 months" Thats misconception that alot of people give that is incorrect. I was PVPing quite succesfully in a destroyer in about 3 weeks. When I got into a Caracal/Moa, a week later I was Pvping also. Thats what we want to keep.
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal	Posted - 2006.08.12 19:52:00 - [37] Originally by: Akira Kaneshiro TBH I think CCP want this thing happens because.. if you think about the GTC and ISK. If the gap became bigger.. better to CCP because people will buy more and more GTC to trade for ISK to buy t2 ships, chars, etc to try decrease the gap between a noob and veteran player. I dont think the total ammount of players in eve has increased so much in the last months. How many people do you know that has more than 1 account? Why? Because noob player are trying fill that difference as much is possible. How many times I read in others forum the advice: "You will be ready to pvp after 6 months" CCP is very happy with this gap between noob player and veteran. No, I don't think so. It doesn't matter how many GTC's are bought and sold with ISK, whoever is buying them would have paid for that time anyway. Whether someone sold him a GTC or he went to the store and bought one himself, either way CCP only get that money once. Also the majority of people with more than one account are people who've been playing for months or years. I think it's fine the way it is. A noob can usually not compete with a vet in tech 2 gear but you know what? It's the same in every game. EVE is all about teamwork, and a noob certainly can gang up with 3 or 4 other noobs and stand a very good chance of killing that vet in his expensive tech 2 ship. The new BFG.
Riho Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2006.08.12 21:32:00 - [38] i dont fly t2 ships in pvp... i rarely use t2 stuff on my ships.... not couse i dont have the skills or the money, but couse i can still beat the crap out of stuff... even t2 stuff. dependant on the opponent ofc :) assault ships (frigs) are bit pricy, but interceptors feel ok to me atleast :P hacs ..... thats another story :P as i see it... t2 stuff = expenice... takse loads of balls to go out and pvp whit one and be redy to loose.... most ppl in even dont have a few bil in the vallet. it takes alot of time to train for it aswell... yes... but they player who invested time and effort. u cant make a 1 month old cruiser pilot at the same lvl as a player who is flying a hac...whats the point of training those extra few months... thats game mechanics, but in the end it comes down to player skill. a really good pilot can take on a hac and own it if the hac pilot is a pvp noob :P if u train for it... u deserve to have an advantage over the player who hasnt trained for it.. or worked for the money to get the item....... PS: hope i make sense... its god knows what time in the middle of the night here
Argenton Sayvers	Posted - 2006.08.12 22:34:00 - [39] Edited by: Argenton Sayvers on 12/08/2006 22:36:43 The thing to keep in mind is that no MMORPG (that i have seen) has real "skillbased" pvp. Even Guildwars has unlock grind and some (rare and only marginally better) PvE-only stuff (last time i checked, maybe they fixed that helmet) They all require various degrees of ability though. I consider chess to be pretty much balanced and fair. In eve, combat is asymmetrical. Because there are a lot of factors involved, players who are clearly at a disadvantage can still will (t1 cruiser vs HAC etc). This is roughly comparable to playing chess against someone who has several queens right from the start. A really good player still will wipe the floor with you. Does it prove anything though? No. This doesnt change the basic nature of combat - your ability at organising PvE grind, dedicating RL resources (either time to grind or money via GTC) etc is an important part of combat. Eve is pvp using logistics. You can win a quake / counter strike / starcraft championship right after installing the game for the first time in your life. The reason why this doesnt happen that often is because you lack practice - something that takes real life time and dedication as well. Sadly, people often tend to confuse time investment in self betterment ("training") with time investment in improved tools ("grind"). So to sum it up, "winning" CounterStrike takes only skillz (inherent to the player, transferable from server to server, even to different games), "winning" eve takes skillz, and "empty" time investment (you as a person dont gain anything from grind). [Yes, there are asymmetries in "pure" pvp games like CS - better computer, faster connection, good gaming mouse / keyboard etc etc] Eve is one of the few games i know that has managed to give a special spin to grind. Because its so blatantly painful and pointless to grind ISK, losses in pvp get a "real" meaning. Wether the balance between grind and actual combat is right or wrong now - just look at the POS wars threads, instagank fleet battle whines, stab nerf requests, insta solutions etc...
Android Mindslave Gallente Mindworks Unlimited	Posted - 2006.08.12 22:45:00 - [40] I think the OP has missed the whole point of EVE. EVE rewards smart play. If you can't play smart, your not going to get rewarded. A noobie will WTFBBQ you if your dumb and their smart. That goes for combat, and the economy.
Testicular Testes	Posted - 2006.08.12 22:50:00 - [41] The only bad elitism in EvE relates to skill requirements for massive increases in effectiveness - ie all the level 5 prereqs et cetera. Because skills are a linear progression, completely unstoppable and infinitely increasing - as opposed to isk, whose making can be stopped, whose value is dynamic and which can be lost and traded. Ships costing a good bit is excellent, as it keeps risk vs reward alive and well - and there is nothing aside from a lack of spine from stopping someone else from making the effort to earn isk and risk it. Skills however are simply an artificial stratification, and their impact should be reduced ASAP :o
Gah'khaz Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.12 22:57:00 - [42] skills are good, old players should have an advantage towards the new players, as should the rich towards the poor, what could do with a change however is to somehow make it so it's not worth killing new unskilled players for the vets and instead let them seek out their peers for some pvp snuggling.
Saeris Tal'Urduar Amarr	Posted - 2006.08.12 23:45:00 - [43] This is the attitude that I think CCP has, and that worries me most. Its the WoW/EQ2/Eastern style MMO mentality. Its the attitude that the people who grind the most deserve to be invulnerable god like damage dealing pwnmobils, and the only way to defent them is to grind just has hard as they did. Thats not EVE, and it never has been, but its what I'm afraid it will become. Originally by: Jim McGregor Well, if they can afford to lose them, I guess they are working hard on making money then. Good for them. I dont see the problem here. Its not unbalanced that some people have lots of money and some dont. And you're right Jim its not unbalanced that some people have a lot of money and others dont. But what will be unbalanced is that when the combo of Combat Boosters and T2 Rigs that can only be fitted on T2 ships will be. And it will make PvP in EVE as we know it about the isk grind only. As it is now, experience in PvP and skill points can be and effectively offset between the meta fitted ship. But I see all this new stuff being afforadble and useable only for the elite rich of EVE, thus leaving the causal gamer wondering why they even bothered? Yes T2 rigs may end up being cheap, but what does that really matter when you can only completely use it on a T2 ship that costs 160M+. Yes this post is about isk, but not because others have it in abundence and I dont. Its about why make yet another new feature optimized just for the people who fly T2 ships. Especially when this one little thing doesnt throw anything out of balance with T2 ships if done the way I suggested. But if done the way CCP wants to, it just widens the gap within the game between the haves and have nots. And as far as I can see for no other reason than to just widen the gap. Hell, its not like T2 ships need yet another boost to their uberness.
Ketrin	Posted - 2006.08.12 23:52:00 - [44] The OP is right. But only if you play EVE 1v1.
Hakiem	Posted - 2006.08.13 00:15:00 - [45] I think the OP is way over concerned about something that no one realy knows what it is going to be. The thing everyone is leaving out is the penalties on rigging, the devs have said the the T2 rigs will have greater penalties then the t1's. Until the rigs are actually out this debate is pointless, just wait and see what happens.
Yeihon Eye of the Abyss	Posted - 2006.08.13 06:25:00 - [46] Edited by: Yeihon on 13/08/2006 06:26:35 oops, wrong thread
spurious signal Caldari Brainiacs	Posted - 2006.08.13 07:38:00 - [47] "CCP making a mistake?" a? So many to choose from :/
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2006.08.13 08:14:00 - [48] Originally by: 000Hunter000 a cerb for 40 mill? where can i order some? dreams on about hacs for 40 mill That's what I pay for HACs. The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur
Wild Rho Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2006.08.13 08:21:00 - [49] My own real concern for the future of eves pvp is the blob war mentality. It's not exactly CCPs fault that it happens as it largely comes down to human nature and people wanting to make sure they win. I also don't see any justifiable way to discourage it either and that's what worries me the most. I think alot of old timers can agree the pvp nowadays isn't nearly up to the same standard as it used to be (and I don't mean becuase of changed game mechanics). WE ARE DYSLEXIC OF BORG. Refutance is systile. Your ass will be laminated. - Jennie Marlboro
spRAYed The Priory	Posted - 2006.08.13 10:55:00 - [50] Edited by: spRAYed on 13/08/2006 11:04:04 This really is pointless. Y!? Should a tech I cruiser be able to beat a HAC? And who said they cant anyway. HAC's ARE NOT GODS HAND, their improoved cruisers. Its very easy to beat a HAC with a Cruiser even with little SP. Hit it where its weak and where it has NO ADVANTAGE compared to any other cruiser. CAP, Nos the bastard dry and u win. Simple. Yes it is, dont care what u say, it just is. HAC's are still cruisers. This isn't a matter of, better ships, tech II or not. It all comes down to experiance and setup anyway. And it sounds very reasonable that a tech I frig cant whoop a Assault frig 9 out of 10 times. Thats where u start to learn picking fights as the underdogs in eve.. ------------------------------ pArlT? Ur watching too many movies dude... ^Sig by Liu Mang
Logan Feynman Legio Ancientis	Posted - 2006.08.13 11:20:00 - [51] So, to sum up the OP's argument: - Something that I have only vague idea how it will work will certainly cause such an imbalance that a cheap ship will never be able to defeat a high-tech expensive ship in solo combat. - This is wrong because we should all have equal chances in battle regardless of how long we play this game and how much effort we put into it. EVE rewards smart playing and team work. It is ridiculously easy to make money in this game and to have fun at the same time. And it is incredibly fun to kill 100+ mil ships with small frigate gangs. For now, I don't see this changing, even with the rigs and combat boosters. Originally by: Marvin the Paranoid Android You live and learn. At any rate, you live.
Glassback M. Corp Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.13 11:21:00 - [52] Originally by: Saeris Tal'Urduar No!! This is where you are getting it wrong, this is where you are once again making it *just* for the elitist wealthy!! You are widening the gap between the T1 causual PvP'r to make it near impossible for them to compete against the T2 flying, combat boosted, 5 billion implanted, T2 rigged, T2 ammo'd opponent. If you want I'll send you a T1 setup for the Tier 1 BS called "Domonix" that will solo any HAC with any number of implants at a fraction of the cost. G. I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.